User talk:Yfever: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Yfever (talk | contribs)
Line 58: Line 58:


:Thanks, I think. I like to think that I am behaving correctly. Have I done anything wrong? Please let me know. [[User:Yfever|Yfever]] ([[User talk:Yfever#top|talk]]) 11:17, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
:Thanks, I think. I like to think that I am behaving correctly. Have I done anything wrong? Please let me know. [[User:Yfever|Yfever]] ([[User talk:Yfever#top|talk]]) 11:17, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

::When a case is closed on AE you can't continue to comment on it (as it states), I've removed your additional comments. No, you are not being sanctioned at this time, if you continue [[WP:TE|tendentious editing]] as listed in the report, you could be. Read the decision, read how editors in this topic area need to behave and use that information going forward. Violating it could lead to sanctions in the form of bans from the topic or blocks from editing. --[[User:Wgfinley|WGFinley]] ([[User talk:Wgfinley|talk]]) 15:05, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:05, 23 January 2012

Welcome!

Hello, Yfever, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Welcome

Hi Yfever, I saw your new article, Cameron Lindsay, and yes, you are doing it right. You didn't get everything right (there are so many things to get right, it would be utterly impossible to get everything right). I did some scaffolding around the article, but it would be great if you could find some references for it, everything on Wikipedia should be verifiable. We currently have a policy that all biographies on living people should contain at least one, and though I'm sure there are some to be found, I still tagged the article, identifying it as a biography currently without sources. One you put at least one reference to the article, just remove that tag. You can find some information on how to format and place references at WP:CITE, but don't swear it. It's far more important that you find the sources and get them into the article than to format them properly. I hope you like Wikipedia, and stick around! best, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:44, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yfever (talk) 04:52, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NZ profiles

Hi; rather than delete NZ football profiles from pages that still refer to the old nzsoccer site as you did to the Glen Moss article, could you instead find their current one at the new NZFootball site here. Thanks. Also, Cameron Lindsey is borderline for notability under subject specific notability guidelines as he has not actually played for Phoenix yet. I have tagged for now, but unless he plays in the next few weeks he is likely to be nominated for deletion. It wouldn't hurt to set about finding sources to back up notability. ps, I have added a welcome template up top which gives a few quick links you may want to get to as a relative newcomer. Cheers --ClubOranjeT 06:34, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! All advice much appreciated. Isn't Cameron an official member of the squad? I just assumed that anyone who made the squad qualified for a page, since everyone else, I think, has one. Yfever (talk) 09:07, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, he is an official member of the squad, but hasn't played yet, which is why I pointed you at Wikipedia:NFOOTBALL#Association_football, which is the result of consensus after multiple discussions at WT:NSPORTS and WT:FOOTBALL. (search the archives if you are particularly interested in the discussions). WP:FOOTBALL is a wikiproject which you may like to join if interested in football; it is a good place to get help on football related subjects. BTW, I responded to your other query at my talk page. --ClubOranjeT 08:11, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

merge discussion

I started a merge discussion for an article you created, see Talk:James_R._Flynn#merge_Race.2C_IQ_and_Jensen_here. --Enric Naval (talk) 11:12, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AfD/Merges, R/I arbitration, discretionary sanctions

Based on your responses in the merge/AfD discussions, it appears that you may not be aware that this topic area has been a morass for quite some time, and went to arbitration last year. This topic area has been plagued by single purpose editors coming here to present their agenda. If you're unaware of this, I suggest you review WP:ARBR&I. Of particular note is the fact that these article are subject to higher scrutiny, and discretionary sanctions can be applied for editing behavior which might go unnoticed in less controversial subject areas. This section discusses the discretionary sanctions which apply to this topic area. aprock (talk) 20:50, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! That is a lot of stuff! Thanks for pointing it out, I think. ;-) Yfever (talk) 02:30, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added an extra note for you

Hello, Yfever. You have new messages at FT2's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

FT2 (Talk | email) 21:02, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration enforcement

I have filed an enforcement request against you here Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Yfever asking that a notification of the arbitration decisions and sanctions imposed on editors in these involved articles is given to you by an administrator. Professor marginalia (talk) 06:01, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. aprock (talk) 23:25, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I will definately participate. Yfever (talk) 11:18, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Accounts

This is not your first account. What is your earlier account? Hipocrite (talk) 13:06, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have used Wikipedia for many years but never registered before. Does just using create an "account"? If so, I don't know how I would identify mine. Is there some tool for doing so? Yfever (talk) 11:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Race & Intelligence Arbitration Enforcement

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to Race and intelligence. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you engage in further inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read in the Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and intelligence#Final decision section of the decision page.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page.

--WGFinley (talk) 18:35, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I think. I like to think that I am behaving correctly. Have I done anything wrong? Please let me know. Yfever (talk) 11:17, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
When a case is closed on AE you can't continue to comment on it (as it states), I've removed your additional comments. No, you are not being sanctioned at this time, if you continue tendentious editing as listed in the report, you could be. Read the decision, read how editors in this topic area need to behave and use that information going forward. Violating it could lead to sanctions in the form of bans from the topic or blocks from editing. --WGFinley (talk) 15:05, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]