User talk:A21sauce

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Aichik)
Jump to: navigation, search

TWL HighBeam check-in[edit]

Hello Wikipedia Library Users,

You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to HighBeam. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:

  • Make sure that you can still log in to your HighBeam account; if you are having trouble feel free to contact me for more information. When your access expires you can reapply at WP:HighBeam.
  • Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. For more information about citing this source, see Wikipedia:HighBeam/Citations
  • Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let us know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thank you. Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Mattress performance[edit]

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Please discuss before you revert or change. Seems to me like vandalism.--Cyve (talk) 02:31, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Look in the mirror, dude. Also, you've only edited this article, so your edits reek of POV. Are you Paul?--A21sauce (talk) 02:33, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
No. And no artist like you. And not from NYC.--Cyve (talk) 02:35, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Clearly, because you treat someone suing someone else as the co-creator of the art piece! lol. And you must be German. I sense some nationalism.--A21sauce (talk) 02:41, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
No nationalism. Sorry to disappoint you. Lil bit of sarcasm maybe (recipe/cook/meal).--Cyve (talk) 02:56, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
But I got the German right. You've also got an irrational need to defend a guy who despite his intellectual talent and drive has 4 people accusing him of assault. Men just need inordinate amounts of freedom, yes?--A21sauce (talk) 20:22, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Given your clearly expressed hostility to one of the article subjects and your stated assumption that he must be guilty, you probably shouldn't be editing that article at all. I request that you stop. Centrify (f / k / a Factchecker_blah_blah_blah) (talk) (contribs) 01:03, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
It seems A21 has a POV, but from my observation, they are not the only one who seems to be editing that article from a specific POV. A21 doesn't seem particularly disruptive at the article and has been discussing concerns on talk page, so it seems not reasonable to ask them to stay away from the article entirely at this point. I also think it's ironic that this edit warring warning to A21sauce was placed by an editor who clearly violated 3RR the day in question, and was warned about it by multiple users.--BoboMeowCat (talk) 15:31, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm not aware of anybody else on that article that is lashing out at supposed political opponents and generally attacking other editors because they made an edit or argument he didn't like. Centrify (f / k / a Factchecker_blah_blah_blah) (talk) (contribs) 00:03, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Right because no one else has bothered to call these other people out. And look in the mirror if you want to talk about editors lashing out at people whose opinions they don't like.--A21sauce (talk) 19:04, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
[citation needed] for that claim. Also I see above you have opined, "Men just need inordinate amounts of freedom, yes?". Likewise, I suppose women need 6-12 months after they've had a sex act before they can decide whether it was consensual or not? Centrify (f / k / a Factchecker_blah_blah_blah) (talk) (contribs) 16:10, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

A rape accusation presented as an artwork is still a rape accusation[edit]

since you made reference to an internal mental struggle you were having trying to comprehend this, perhaps the above will clear things up for you a teensy bit. Cheers! Centrify (f / k / a Factchecker_blah_blah_blah) (talk) (contribs) 23:45, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

What are you yammering on about? See, this is where it gets tricky, an editor who thinks they can read someone else's mind. And you clearly haven't done enough reading on the case it's all fresh news to you apparently anyway.--A21sauce (talk) 19:10, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Learn to read plz kthxbye Centrify (f / k / a Factchecker_blah_blah_blah) (talk) (contribs) 16:11, 3 May 2015 (UTC)


Re: this, if you're referring to two brief off-topic comments about beer, following many serious and constructive comments on topic by the same two users, I think most would say your comment is overblown and does more harm than good. But I'll let it stand. Have a great day. ―Mandruss  19:35, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

No, it went a little further prior to that, as you well know, but hopefully you'll be more careful now;)--A21sauce (talk) 19:43, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
We are people, not robots, and we will stray from time to time. It's a matter of degree, and I really don't think the goal of that thread was hindered much. So no, I don't plan to change my behavior in talk threads, especially since you're the first to object to it in close to two years of editing. ―Mandruss  19:54, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Okay, then expect more comments from non-male people. Because you know Wikipedia is not unproblematic with women editors.--A21sauce (talk) 19:58, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
I did not know you were non-male. If you thought I did, it likely altered how you perceived my response, and not in a good way. Genderless identity has its downside. I now have your complaint in the correct context, and I'm interested to know, besides the two beer comments, what annoying male behavior in that thread "went a little further prior to that". ―Mandruss  22:29, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Are you saying you would've acted "more gentlemanly" had you known I wasn't a guy? Are you saying you need to know that there's a woman around to monitor you like a mom or a librarian to act properly? Please do some work, and on this: Go over again to the last 11 entries in the thread we're talking about. Read them aloud to a female friend. Your comments get much more exposure than you would ever would have doing your own blog, in return, I think we can ask that high school behavior be kept to a minimum on something serious. If this were a talk page on some toy plane there'd be different expectations. Thanks --A21sauce (talk) 17:42, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
(inserted out of turn) Wow, way to respond to a plain, direct question with childish & offensive bluster. Great Job, A21. Centrify (f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username) (talk) (contribs) 14:37, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Policy violations aside, no one on this site has the right to try to impose their ideas of "proper" behavior on the group as a whole. If I have to conform my speech according to your desires, is the reverse true? If so, I respectfully ask you to refrain from showing open hostility toward your fellow editors in public spaces, because I (genuinely) find that offensive. If you feel you have a right to your demands, but I don't, don't you think that's patently hypocritical? I do. ―Mandruss  20:32, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
Upon reflection, I think I can predict that your reply, if any is given, will be along the lines of, "If men will behave like gentlemen, I promise not to be hostile in response." That is probably what I'd say in your place, and it will be hard to fault such an argument, so I'll withdraw that. But I don't think it's realistic to expect that anyone will be shamed or scolded into changing their behavior here. I've been around awhile and I've never known that to work anywhere in life. All it does is create resentment and pushback, that's just human nature. Ask a psychologist, and I think they'll support me on that. So your approach would seem to be self-defeating. ―Mandruss  00:01, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Okay, Mandruss, point taken. But remember that the right of free speech assumes a level playing field, and I just want you to think about how it really is not that, a level playing field, Wikipedia, as reflected in US media, US society. That's all. You're more sensitive than most and I appreciate that. Thanks for your thoughtfulness on the matter.--A21sauce (talk) 04:52, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Linda Nishio[edit]

Hello A21sauce,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Linda Nishio for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Arcticgriffin (talk) 22:40, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Be careful[edit]

... with edit summaries like this. Do not accuse of someone being on someone's payroll. Learn to edit with civility. Else I'm sure administrators would find your attitude extremely heartening. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 04:52, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

You have been reverted more than three times by two different editors about the Christopher Ciccone quote in Madonna. Raise a discussion in talk page per wP:BRD and gain consensus, and do not WP:EW. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 05:14, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
I didn't revert it twice, idiot. The first was a response to SNUGGUMS claim that it was in the wrong section. Funnily, he came up with another excuse when I put it in an appropriate section.--A21sauce (talk) 05:19, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Again, maintain civility, this is my last warning to you. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 05:53, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Warn away.--A21sauce (talk) 21:20, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


Just because the article is about an alleged rape doesn't mean you're given extra license to make pointlessly misanthropic comments in response to acceptable talk page chatter. Centrify (f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username) (talk) (contribs) 14:34, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

When you start to spend your time dealing with actual problems in the world, I'll talk to you.--A21sauce (talk) 20:39, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
Fabulous, in the meantime do watch your mouth, Ms. Insults-a-lot. Centrify (f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username) (talk) (contribs) 23:31, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
When you watch yours, Mr. Love-to-Control-Women-Online.--A21sauce (talk) 23:56, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
Holy livid buckets of crap, you've got an attitude problem towards men. Centrify (f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username) (talk) (contribs) 00:07, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Nope, just you, sir. Find something else to do, seriously, or I'll lodge a complaint.--A21sauce (talk) 00:09, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
(posted this before I saw your template) A21, you must admit that you have repeatedly complained about men for nothing more than being male, just in that one article. You lashed out at Bus stop and someone else for 2 comments about having a beer, which was weird because women drink beer. And not for nothing but Bus stop has been a vigorous proponent for favorable treatment of Sulkowicz's side so I think he is entitled to both your courtesy and thanks for developing the article in a way that I think you favor. Anyway you can't seriously expect to exclude men and it's not really civil to keep complaining about males or maleness or WP demographics.. and accusing me of "loving to control women online", that's just rude. Anyway surely you can engage at that article without trying to institute OWS-style rules? Centrify (f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username) (talk) (contribs) 00:25, 9 June 2015 (UTC)


Hi A21, I made a start on a Linda Nishio article here, in case it helps to save it. Feel free to copy that to your user space if you want to. It's probably not enough as it is, but if you update it it might be notable enough. If you do decide to develop it, you could check with Keegan whether it's okay to restore it. Best, Sarah (SV) (talk) 01:44, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Slim!! I'm done with Keegan, so I'll ask someone else to restore it. --A21sauce (talk) 20:41, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Mattress affair[edit]

I'm notifying you of sanctions related to Mattress Performance and Emma Sulkowicz. I do not believe you are responsible for any misconduct, but your differences in opinion with other editors have made progress difficult. I recognize we simply have a fundamental disagreement about the interpretation of policy and I do not mean to imply any tendentiousness on your part.

Commons-emblem-notice.svg This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
Commons-emblem-notice.svg This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

--Sammy1339 (talk) 17:34, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about but since you're pretty aggro on a subject that you have admitted you care nothing about, I'll be sure to watch your actions more closely from here on out and bring you to the necessary administrator's board to get you blocked if need be.--A21sauce (talk) 18:00, 14 June 2015 (UTC)


I have restored File:OpeningDayIncheonBiennale2009.jpg. It looks like when you initially uploaded it, you tagged it as being used under a claim of fair use, which is not acceptable under our image use policy. As you said in one of the edit summaries, you were confused by the templates and it looks like you inadvertently hid the source information for the image.

I will try to make it simple:

1. Am I correct in my understanding that you are the photographer and copyright holder of this image? In other words, did you hold the camera in your hands, and click the button to take the picture? I have added the template {{own}}, which is sufficient here if this picture is completely your own work.

1.a. If it is NOT your own work or if you have ever published it outside of Wikipedia, then we need to have a statement of permission from the copyright holder submitted to There is a sample permission template at WP:CONSENT that can be used. (Again, this is only necessary if either (a) it is not your work or (b) you have ever published it outside of Wikipedia.)

2. (Assuming that you are the photographer/copyright holder) If you edit the image and look down at the bottom where it says {{di-no license|date=17 June 2015}}, please replace that tag with the licensing tag of your choice. The "standard" choice is {{self|author=Your name here|cc-by-sa-3.0|gfdl}}. (When you paste that in, replace "Your name here" with how you would like to be attributed -

2.a. (If you are NOT the copyright holder, then, once the statement of permission from the copyright holder is received at, we will add the copyright tag for you.)

I hope this helps. I apologize for how confusing it can be. If you reply and would like to call my attention to this page, please include {{ping|B}} in your reply and that will alert me that there is a message here the next time I log in. --B (talk) 21:09, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks so much!--A21sauce (talk) 18:06, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

June 2015[edit]

Information icon Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. MarnetteD|Talk 20:45, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

I didn't and made my case. There's got to be some Administrator intervention on that one.--A21sauce (talk) 21:00, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
You clearly violated WP:BLP by entering false info. Please feel free to report this to any admin that you wish. You might want to read WP:BOOMERANG before doing so. MarnetteD|Talk 21:05, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Still haven't provide backup. Why can't you listen to simple instructions?--A21sauce (talk) 22:42, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

By posts on DRN and the article talkpage, I've excused you from further editing concerning this individual. On reflecting, I don't think this situation warrants the "paperwork" and the negativity associated with formally documenting a topic-ban under the BLP discretionary sanctions, unless you insist on it, but I do instruct you to cut it out. Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:00, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Regarding your edits to Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, and subsequent appeal to WP:AN/I for support:

Rainbow trout transparent.png Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

-- The Anome (talk) 18:39, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Love it, the Anome. An editor with a sense of humor!--A21sauce (talk) 15:32, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Seeing this exchange, I'm wondering whether you were also trying to inject humor into the Matress Performance discussion. What do you think about merging the two articles under a new name, "Emma Sulkowicz"? I think editorially it makes sense, and arguably she's now elevated above her artwork as individual pieces alone.Mattnad (talk) 19:43, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Don't think there's a need: Mattress Performance clearly still the more important work. Let's wait another year or so and see what else Emma comes up with.--A21sauce (talk) 17:43, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
You wouldn't know that from the efforts to have huge amounts of each article cross posted. I don't think having the Matress Performance as a sub section in an article on her diminishes its importance. Have all of her current works organized under a single article makes a lot more sense than having large overlapping sections and cross linking between the two articles. It's really the right thing to do editorially. But your views are noted. Mattnad (talk) 20:12, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

July 8: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC[edit]

Wednesday July 8, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

This month will also feature on a review of past and upcoming editathons, including Black Lunch Table Editathon @ MoMA on July 13.

We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.

After the main meeting, pizza and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

Featuring a keynote talk this month to be determined! We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 05:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

The Wikipedia Library needs you![edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

  • Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
  • Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
  • Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
  • Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
  • Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
  • Research coordinators: run reference services

Sign up now

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)


If you get a notification that I just rolled back one of your edits, please ignore it. That was an inadvertent misclick on my so-called smart phone, and I have restored the edit. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 04:28, 8 July 2015 (UTC)