User talk:Koavf/Archive061
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Koavf. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
 User talk:Koavf archives | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Close to Home (Aitch album)
I am very confused by your revert of my edits to Close to Home (Aitch album) and the updates you made in their place. Using the track listing template when there are a variety of writers and producers seemed most appropriate, and you removed credited personnel for reasons I don't quite understand. The original version of the personnel section was/is incredibly cluttered largely due to the production credits, and the rewritten track list you provided is virtually unreadable to me.
Obviously I'm not the only person working on album articles and my opinion isn't the only one, but I've always understood your reverts/re-edits in the past and this one is confounding me. Can you help me understand what made you change the article in this way, as opposed to keeping the edit I made? Sock (tock talk) 11:57, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
- The track listing template is ugly and I don't like it. This article already has an established style, and I didn't see a need to change it. Which credited personnel were removed? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:00, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
- I'm only two and a half months late but I didn't get notified of this response for some reason, sorry about that! You're absolutely right about the established style and I've adjusted my editing habits in the time since to stop restructuring album articles in the way that I typically do them if I'm adding additional information, so that part I'm happy to drop out of my confusion. I also saw that you [ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Close_to_Home_(Aitch_album)&oldid=1158710128restored the producers to the infobox], which was much obliged and one of the things I figured you agreed with from my initial edit.
- In regards to the personnel that was removed or altered, this was my mistake. I found the CD liner notes and can see that the "bass guitar/drums/guitar/etc." credits are not on the actual record, so I totally get why you undid those. I also missed some of your follow-up edits where you restored the handful of people I saw that were initially missing. The only minor things I went back to correct is that Fred Again is just credited as FRED and that Aminé is credited for additional vocals, but overall I was off the mark here.
- The only thing I'm still confused by is the removal of featured artists from the track listing, which is especially surprising since I don't think I've ever seen a track listing that doesn't include features in that section. The vocalists are still in the Personnel section, but that doesn't acknowledge that they're specifically credited as featured artists.
- Sorry for the novel, conciseness evidently isn't one of my strong suits. Sock (
tocktalk) 16:58, 21 August 2023 (UTC)- No worries at all, friend. We aren't obliged to reproduce liner notes exactly as they are written, so I don't make it a point to force every bit of information that is used for marketing or inside jokes or extraneous thanks, etc. into the article. I think that "Song" (featuring [Person]) is just marketing that is not relevant to understanding a track listing, so I don't include it. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:03, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry for the novel, conciseness evidently isn't one of my strong suits. Sock (
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Oi! video albums
A tag has been placed on Category:Oi! video albums indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 03:24, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello. Just curious how you came noticed my edit to Template:The Go! Team? It doesn't appear you've edited it before... Ss112 07:59, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
- It's on my watchlist. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:The_Go!_Team&action=history ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:00, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
- Oh. Thanks for letting me know! Ss112 08:02, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
- No problem. Thanks for improving the article. Have a nice day. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:02, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
- Oh. Thanks for letting me know! Ss112 08:02, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
anonymous users
why don't you answer anonymous users when asking questions in chat massage?? Xhuuiya (talk) 12:44, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
- What chat? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:22, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Big! (Betty Who album)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Big! (Betty Who album), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 09:48, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
Mewgenics edit
Hey, Koavf. I hope you're doing well. I just wanted to bring up an edit you made to Mewgenics that may have included a typo, as it looks like you were going to insert a template, but it didn't come out right. Just wanted to see if you had thoughts on it. BOTTO (T•C) 00:09, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
- That it did, friend! Merci. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:10, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you so much! I appreciate you putting in work on an article for what will surely be another significant chapter in Edmund McMillen's career. :) BOTTO (T•C) 16:32, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Contemporary worship music compilation albums indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 05:58, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
African Union
This is slightly disingenuous, especially since you have a long history with the article and were the only one fully supporting retention. I'm not going to contest it since in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter, but the consensus was to delete, not redirect. Star Mississippi 19:13, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- What is disingenuous? I didn't make a claim about the consensus, but what would have been most prudent or best practice. As I'm sure you know, sometimes during these discussions, someone will bring up an alternative that not everyone else has considered. Do you think that deletion is better than redirecting? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:15, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
this should have been redirected
is making a claim about the consensus. In this case, deletion v. retention is moot, since the problematic content (from the POV of discussion participants) is no longer present with the redirect being created post deletion. That's what I meant by grand scheme of things. But yes, the call to redirect or not would have been better made by someone who wasn't the creator who also !voted keep. Like I said, not contesting it, but your statement is not a reflection of what "should" have happened as an outcome of that AfD. Star Mississippi 19:19, 11 June 2023 (UTC)- I was not making a claim about the consensus and saying "You messed up by not reading the discussion correctly", I was making a claim about best practice and saying "This will result in the most useful approach for others". I don't think I understand your answer to my question: can you please reword it and just say yes or no? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:29, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- I think I understand your decision a little more here (wrong conclusion v. most helpful). So all good with your decision/redirection. Have a good one. Star Mississippi 20:20, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- Sure. Sorry for my ambiguity. "I don't think I understand your answer to my question: can you please reword it and just say yes or no? " ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:21, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Star Mississippi: ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:48, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
- Missed your last reply, apologies.
- Yes, the redirect is helpful to the reader. Star Mississippi 12:29, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
- No worries--thanks kindly for answering and being a helpful admin. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:40, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
- Always happy to help! Star Mississippi 00:38, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
- No worries--thanks kindly for answering and being a helpful admin. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:40, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Star Mississippi: ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:48, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
- Sure. Sorry for my ambiguity. "I don't think I understand your answer to my question: can you please reword it and just say yes or no? " ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:21, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- I think I understand your decision a little more here (wrong conclusion v. most helpful). So all good with your decision/redirection. Have a good one. Star Mississippi 20:20, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- I was not making a claim about the consensus and saying "You messed up by not reading the discussion correctly", I was making a claim about best practice and saying "This will result in the most useful approach for others". I don't think I understand your answer to my question: can you please reword it and just say yes or no? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:29, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Category:The Circle (band) live albums has been nominated for merging
Category:The Circle (band) live albums has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 10:44, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
--Bbb23exposed 190.86.32.91 (talk) 21:04, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Koavf, I have received your replies and intend to answer. I am taking my time to write a through post though, so it may be a while. In the meantime, do you think you could comment on this thread? Thanks! --Bbb23exposed 185.199.231.45 (talk) 15:10, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
- Oh boy. This seems complex... ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:12, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
- Are you going to read all of it? Cheers, --Bbb23exposed 185.199.229.156 (talk) 15:21, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
- I may. Seems like a lot to digest and it's about a topic that I don't particularly enjoy thinking about. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:24, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
- If you do read the whole thing, will you leave a comment with your own thoughts/observations? --Bbb23exposed (talk) 15:38, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
- Yes. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:44, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
- If you do read the whole thing, will you leave a comment with your own thoughts/observations? --Bbb23exposed (talk) 15:38, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
- I may. Seems like a lot to digest and it's about a topic that I don't particularly enjoy thinking about. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:24, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
- Are you going to read all of it? Cheers, --Bbb23exposed 185.199.229.156 (talk) 15:21, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
- Oh boy. This seems complex... ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:12, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 17
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Under My Influence, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Snakehips.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
Discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 18 § Category:Association football people by prefecture in Japan
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 18 § Category:Association football people by prefecture in Japan. Qwerfjkltalk 16:38, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
You're invited! Wiki Loves Pride in Indianapolis
| Upcoming Indianapolis event - June 24, 2023: Wiki Loves Pride Indy | ||
|---|---|---|
 |
You are invited to join us at Spades Park Branch Library for a Wiki Loves Pride editathon—hosted by the Wikimedians of Indiana User Group with support from the Central Indiana Community Foundation. Together, new and experienced Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on LGBTQ+ topics, individuals, organizations, and legislation in Indiana.
We hope to see you there! Sincerely, Wikimedians of Indiana User Group |
 |
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 16:30, 19 June 2023 (UTC).)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1770s establishments in Maine
A tag has been placed on Category:1770s establishments in Maine indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 06:35, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1780s establishments in Maine
A tag has been placed on Category:1780s establishments in Maine indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 06:35, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Father/Daughter Records EPs
A tag has been placed on Category:Father/Daughter Records EPs indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 06:36, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Home Is Where EPs
A tag has been placed on Category:Home Is Where EPs indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 06:36, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Sales charts/Sales certifications
Hi Koavf. I hope this message finds you well. I wanted to bring to your attention a minor concern regarding the headings "Sales certifications" and "Sales charts" that I noticed you are using. I believe there might be a slight inaccuracy in these terms. Firstly, when referring to certifications, it's worth noting that historically they were primarily based on shipments rather than actual sales. Nowadays, they are mostly determined by streams, which do not necessarily equate to sales figures. Therefore, it would be more accurate to use the term "Certifications" instead of "Sales certifications." Similarly, the term "Sales charts" might not accurately depict the content being referred to, as many, or even most, charts are based on airplay rather than sales. Furthermore, other charts utilize metrics such as streams or even impressions, which further deviate from direct sales figures. Have fun editing! --Muhandes (talk) 09:46, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Neat, thanks! I always appreciate someone making me less ignorant. Be well, friend. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:47, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of This Stupid World
The article This Stupid World you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:This Stupid World for comments about the article, and Talk:This Stupid World/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Voorts -- Voorts (talk) 04:22, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Category:Bibliographies by writer nationality
Please see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_June_27#Works_by_writer_nationality. – Fayenatic London 11:03, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Rhythm and blues albums by Argentine artists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 06:15, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Peacefully resolve edit war
Hello, I want to discuss the dispute of colors being added to page content. Adding colors to track listings, like you have done to Pigments (album), serves no purpose except to maybe look cooler. Colors (Ken Nordine album) as well, especially the "flesh" track which seems like just a gradient of skin colors?
You made what looks like a dispute compromise to Pigments by listing the colors in a line after the tracks?
One minute after reverting me you added {{inuse}} to Colors (Ken Nordine album) and went along your way (possibly to prevent me from removing those colored tracks as well?) Please let me know. Apmh 16:28, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
- I had already added the color samples to the article a day(s) prior and had been working on that album on and off for several hours: see the edit history. I'm not assuming that you're trying to start edit wars all about, just marking it as I probably should have prior to starting a spate of edits. If you want to remove the color bar, whatever. Don't add the track listing template and don't act like my edits are vandalism and need to be reverted with an anti-vandalism tool: that's poor form at best and poisons the well for discussion. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:56, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Hip hop albums by Faroese artists
A tag has been placed on Category:Hip hop albums by Faroese artists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:18, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Crustaceans described in 2023
A tag has been placed on Category:Crustaceans described in 2023 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:09, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
Succession boxes
Hello, I hope you are well. I just noticed this edit of yours to Stevie Wonder's album [1] and wanted to let you know MOS:CHARTS tells editors not to include succession boxes for songs and albums. I remember them being deleted from most articles years ago. 120.17.217.85 (talk) 23:45, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
- Hello again. Not sure if you got my previous message but I have removed the succession boxes from the articles you added it to. Hope that's ok. There was an RFC in 2018 that led to it being added to the guideline. 120.17.217.85 (talk) 00:31, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
- Merci! I'll stop. Great looking out, friend. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:32, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Blues albums by Guatemalan artists
A tag has been placed on Category:Blues albums by Guatemalan artists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 23:50, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Jazz albums by Guatemalan artists
A tag has been placed on Category:Jazz albums by Guatemalan artists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 23:51, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Soul albums by Guatemalan artists
A tag has been placed on Category:Soul albums by Guatemalan artists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 23:51, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
When the Poems Do What They Do moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, When the Poems Do What They Do, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs citations from reliable, independent sources and actual content. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Kleuske (talk) 12:16, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
- Why did you post this? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:18, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Kleuske: ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:41, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
- The article wasn't ready for main article space (lacking sources and content). In draftspace you can work on it in peace. Kleuske (talk) 12:43, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Kleuske: did you see that it was tagged {{inuse}}? The only person who disturbed my peace about editing it was you by moving it. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:45, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
- The article wasn't ready for main article space (lacking sources and content). In draftspace you can work on it in peace. Kleuske (talk) 12:43, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
The article The Tuxedo Begins has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Does not appear to be notable, no reviews found in a BEFORE
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DonaldD23 talk to me 22:53, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
- You didn't find reviews in a search you did? Is that what you're saying? https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22the+tuxedo+begins%22+review&ia=web ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:58, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Cosmic Wink
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Cosmic Wink, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 14:55, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Cosmic Wink
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Cosmic Wink, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL" error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 14:55, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
Nomination of Sun Arcs for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sun Arcs until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
QuietHere (talk | contributions) 03:51, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Western Cum
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Western Cum, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 03:52, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
GAC review?
Hi @Koavf. I significantly expanded Built to Spill Plays the Songs of Daniel Johnston and nominated it at GAC. Given your knowledge of indie rock, I was wondering if you would be interested in conducting the review. Thanks! voorts (talk/contributions) 02:47, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- It looks like someone else got to it. Good job. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:42, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Suburban Noize Records video albums
A tag has been placed on Category:Suburban Noize Records video albums indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:15, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Judy at Carnegie Hall
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Judy at Carnegie Hall, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 19:59, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Judy at Carnegie Hall
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Judy at Carnegie Hall, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 19:59, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Rhythm and blues albums by Guatemalan artists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:14, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on A New Tomorrow
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page A New Tomorrow, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 20:50, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
hello. Help improvements. Thanks. 27.65.26.100 (talk) 06:32, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
- Okay. How? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:32, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
- The IP spammed this message to 30 or so user talk pages. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:25, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
- eye roll emoji. Thanks.
- ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:27, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
- The IP spammed this message to 30 or so user talk pages. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:25, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
Categorization project
Hello Koavf. I am categorizing Assassinated politicians by time, I don't know if the topic interests you. If it does and you have the desire, you are welcome to check Category:2000s assassinated politicians by continent. The red links emulate the links in Category:Assassinated politicians by continent. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 01:01, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'm a little preoccupied at the moment, but this is generally the kind of thing that interests me. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:02, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Category:Film scores by composer nationality has been nominated for renaming
Category:Film scores by composer nationality has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. fgnievinski (talk) 21:02, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Jay-Z compilation albums
A tag has been placed on Category:Jay-Z compilation albums indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 19:36, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
You're invited! Indiana State Fair Wiknic on Sunday, July 30
| Upcoming Indianapolis event - July 30, 2023: Indiana State Fair Wiknic | ||
|---|---|---|
 |
We are partnering with the Indiana State Fair to offer FREE tickets to the fair for Wikipedians! We will be meeting on July 30th at 10am to pass out tickets and have a quick info session before we attend the fair (feel free to branch off and share your accomplishments on the Meetup page later!) Detailed instructions on how the day will go is available on the Meetup page! We hope you'll join us to edit about things related to fair (historic buildings, foods, animals, activities, and the fair itself). All levels of experience are welcome! Please RSVP so we know who is coming. We hope you'll join us!
We hope to see you there! Sincerely, Wikimedians of Indiana User Group |
|
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 13:54, 22 July 2023 (UTC).)
- Hi Justin, I just wanted to make sure you saw this invitation! I know you were interested in the user group a while back. In this case, as I wrote on the event page, we've been gifted a bunch of free tickets by the State Fair to distribute to Wikipedians. Even if you can't make it at the time we scheduled the event, since you don't need the Wikipedia tutorial, let me know if you'd still like to use a free ticket any other time during fair season. You can just upload some photos or do other edits (or even a new article). I already have the tickets in my possession, so I'd be happy to find a way to get them to you! Dominic·t 02:59, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- How kind. I will not be in town until August 20, tho. :/ ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:02, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- Too bad! Let me know if plans change (Or you get back early enough to head over for the last day!). Dominic·t 13:26, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
- You'll be the first to know. Have fun and be good. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:29, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
- Too bad! Let me know if plans change (Or you get back early enough to head over for the last day!). Dominic·t 13:26, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
- How kind. I will not be in town until August 20, tho. :/ ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:02, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 23
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Automatic for the People, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fall on Me.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:32, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Welshpool Frillies
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Welshpool Frillies, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 04:40, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
First of all, the Personnel section was added by whom I suspect to be a possible sock of User:Fileman67, so I don't trust them as far as I can throw them. Secondly, it's quite bold of you to re-add this information without providing an actual citation, which makes me question your research methods as a longtime editor. That leads me to my next point: I cannot find any of the listed credits on the album's liner notes, so either people aren't uploading the proper images or you are too lazy/busy to look them up yourself. Instead of reverting my edits, I highly suggest you start a new Personnel section from scratch, using actual citations, instead of defending a possible block evader with no valid evidence to back them up. ResPM (T🔈🎵C) 19:23, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- Sure. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:08, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive
| Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive |  |
August 2023 Backlog Drive:
| |
| Other ways to participate: | |
| You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. | |
Perfect Union
Hi Koavf. Welcome back by the way. Just want to find out if it is your goal to change the format of the chart table that has been shown on MOS:CHARTS for years? You say there is nothing that says to not include a column for years, yet the page has plenty of visual representations of what it is supposed to look like. I do not believe it has to say the words explicitly. But it does say, a table "should" not "must" use wikitable sortable. There would never be a need for someone to sort a row of one, so that is why I removed it in this case. I feel if you want to change a long-established format, it should be discussed. Thanks. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 15:07, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
- Those are good points. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:52, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
"Jon Barron" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect Jon Barron has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 2 § Jon Barron until a consensus is reached. --Finngall talk 16:01, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
DYK for This Stupid World
On 3 August 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article This Stupid World, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that almost 40 years into their career, American indie rock band Yo La Tengo released their first self-produced album, This Stupid World, in 2023? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/This Stupid World. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, This Stupid World), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Arena Rock Recording Company soundtracks indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 23:07, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Better source request for File:The Clientele - I Am Not There Anymore.jpg
Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia:
You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete or generic. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact source (such as the web page, or printed document) where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain, search engine, pinboard, aggregator, or the direct/bare URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. — Ирука13 07:51, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
- ??? It's one of 100,000 digital album scans that we have here. What needs to be investigated? Is this serious? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:55, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Dave Holmes
I'm really embarrassed to have muffed that one. I looked at the dab page, and it didn't mention that the actor was also a writer (it does now), and I looked at the reference and the author bio, and it didn't mention that he was an actor/TV personality. I'm glad you knew more than I did and fixed it. Thanks! —ShelfSkewed Talk 02:28, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- You muffed nothing, friend: I'm a supreme mufti here. All my fault. Teamwork makes the dream work. <3 ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:17, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
The article List of 2020 This American Life episodes has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Lacking secondary sources for information
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:01, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 12
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited End of World, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hot press.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
Producer order question
Hello there! I was combing the edit history of Sundial (album) looking for something unrelated when I saw this edit from you. This ordering was actually my doing, and I alphabetized based on first name rather than last name. Typically I sort by first name/stage name since the list can read strangely when there's a mix of the two, but it seems I might be off base doing that.
I'm struggling to word this concisely, so I'll give an example: if an album was produced by Ariel Rechtshaid, Jack Antonoff, Easyfun, and Cashmere Cat, you would order that Jack Antonoff > Cashmere Cat > Easyfun > Ariel Rechtshaid? Sock (tock talk) 16:36, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Noding for the ages
I saw a familiar username elseweb and, sure enough, it was none other. Fancy seeing you there! jp×g 21:44, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Ha. I have a dream of noding more consistently some day, but alas. Did anything I wrote do anything for you? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:16, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Hackney Diamonds
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Hackney Diamonds, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 08:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Coldplay chronology
Please don't include the extended plays on Coldplay's chronology again. The band released 18 of them, but only 5 are notable enough to warrant their own page. Furthermore, making an albums-only chronology allow users to navigate between album articles more easily. GustavoCza (talk • contribs) 12:27, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
- The consensus is to include all albums in the chronologies, not segregate out certain types. If you want to change that, please take it up on WT:ALBUM. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:41, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Ping
Hey, I pinged you to the Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) just in case you were interested in the thread. Regards, --Thinker78 (talk) 01:38, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
- Good deal. It is interesting. Grazie, amigo. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:43, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
Category:Political music albums by Argentine artists has been nominated for merging
Category:Political music albums by Argentine artists has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 12:45, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
"🐱🚀" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect 🐱🚀 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 27 § 🐱🚀 until a consensus is reached. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 11:54, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Real Life Barnstar |
| Congratulations on your new global rights. I will be busy and be away for a while in the near future, best wishes to you. -Lemonaka 10:33, 28 August 2023 (UTC) |
- Merci, amigo. Be well in real life. I look forward to bumping into you in the WikiSphere again. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:40, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Stanley Kubrick filmography
There are templates for all those URLs....0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 08:51, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- Okay........................................ ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:08, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
August 2023
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Hackney Diamonds. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. – bradv 17:17, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- Why did you post this? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:18, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- That should be self-explanatory. You have made 4 reverts in the last 24 hours (1, 2, 3, 4). You have to stop this. – bradv 17:24, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- These are IPs inserting false information and unsourced claims. Why would I not remove that? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:25, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- You made no effort to discuss these or explain why you reverting, neither on the talk page nor on the user talk page. If you are claiming a vandalism or BLP exemption that should be made clear at the time you make the edit. This looks to me like textbook ownership issues. – bradv 17:29, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- That is not true. See my edit summaries and User talk:2001:871:23:500A:D831:6111:C79E:FEBF and User talk:2001:871:23:500A:ED38:50CC:E93E:816C. Why are you posting these untrue things to my talk page? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:30, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- ? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:31, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- You made no effort to discuss these or explain why you reverting, neither on the talk page nor on the user talk page. If you are claiming a vandalism or BLP exemption that should be made clear at the time you make the edit. This looks to me like textbook ownership issues. – bradv 17:29, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- So if someone keeps on inserting that Mickey Mouse is president and cites a People magazine article that never mentions that, I'm not allowed to remove that? Did you look at these edits? Surely you're familiar with WP:3RR and WP:BLP/WP:V/WP:OR. I don't understand this. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:29, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- These are IPs inserting false information and unsourced claims. Why would I not remove that? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:25, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) It does appear that at least some (if not most) your reverts here would be exempt from WP:3RR as fairly evident vandalism/BLP violation. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 17:25, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- That should be self-explanatory. You have made 4 reverts in the last 24 hours (1, 2, 3, 4). You have to stop this. – bradv 17:24, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Gwar - The New Dark Ages
Hi, I saw you undid the text I did on Gwar's The New Dark Ages. There are other wiki pages that says "Cover Art by [Artist]" like SOD's Speak English or Die and The Very Best of Meat Loaf. Therefore, it should be allowed. Krisfrosz133 (talk) 03:27, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
- It should not. See {{Infobox album}}: the
captionfield is for when there are multiple versions of an album cover and you provide context for the one depicted. I'll remove its misuse on those pages. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:51, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
As you may have noticed before reading this, I went ahead and made some major changes/additions to the above article. These were mostly based on a draft I've been building since May. If you didn't notice, the redirect version of the page had {{r with possibilities}} on it, which explicitly says "please do not create an article from this redirect". Just wanted to point that out so you know for next time to check for a draft first. Hopefully the history merge goes off without any issues and this won't have been a problem at all. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 15:34, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
- Well, I'll be: it does explicitly say that, so I owe you an apology. Please forgive me for the headaches, Q. My most sincere apologies and please tell me how I can clean up my mess. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:20, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
- Apology accepted, though it's really not that big a deal. Just a bit more scrambling in my Wikipedia editing this morning than I was expecting. I already took care of the merger so the only bit left is the history merge which, unless you have permissions to handle that, is out of both of our hands. The rest is just making a nice, well kept article, which I'm happy to share the duty on with you and whoever else comes along to edit it. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 16:57, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
- I do not have those permissions. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:23, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
- Apology accepted, though it's really not that big a deal. Just a bit more scrambling in my Wikipedia editing this morning than I was expecting. I already took care of the merger so the only bit left is the history merge which, unless you have permissions to handle that, is out of both of our hands. The rest is just making a nice, well kept article, which I'm happy to share the duty on with you and whoever else comes along to edit it. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 16:57, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
L7 discography
Hello again! I wanted to ask you about the exact title of the article L7 (band) discography; how come it's currently named that way? Especially in comparison to the articles of discographies by similarly common names such as Hole and Tool. Wouldn't just "L7 discography" be better? Carlinal (talk) 05:54, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- I think if the main article is "foo (bar)", then articles named after it should be "foo (bar) baz". ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:26, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Manual of style
Yo. I'm very interested in getting the albums MoS integrated into the main Wikipedia MoS.
What would be most helpful for me to do? Should I attempt to follow the instructions given after you enquired the MoS page, or do we need a more detailed plan? (Genuinely no idea here.) Popcornfud (talk) 13:24, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
- I picked away at it a little bit, but I'm happy to get help for sure. Please dive in. I'll continue to pick away. I don't know that we need a more detailed plan than follow those instructions and then post to WT:ALBUM to get final consensus. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:52, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
- Gotcha. I'll see if I can pick away at it over the coming weeks. Popcornfud (talk) 19:06, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
theo
Hi yes i saw you on my talk page Theobegley2013 (talk) 22:47, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
- Nice to wiki-meet you. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:31, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Album certifications
Hi, I’m not sure how familiar you are with album certifications but I opened up a discussion on here regarding whether or not we’re supposed to keep a sales ref after an album has been updated with a new cert. If you’re able to please comment there. Thank you! Pillowdelight (talk) 00:00, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
- I did see the thread, but I'm not particularly knowledgeable about, nor do I have strong feelings on charts and certifications. :/ ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:31, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
- That okay, I figured I’d try to reach out. I’ve seen your edits before and knew you were very familiar with music articles. Pillowdelight (talk) 16:50, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
- Very appreciated. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:31, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
- That okay, I figured I’d try to reach out. I’ve seen your edits before and knew you were very familiar with music articles. Pillowdelight (talk) 16:50, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
The file File:The Rolling Stones - Hackney Diamonds.png has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the file should explain why.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:The Rolling Stones - Hackney Diamonds.png
Thanks for uploading File:The Rolling Stones - Hackney Diamonds.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:48, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Little Bit of Sun moved to draft
Hi - I noticed you've left Little Bit of Sun in article space for quite a long time with no content, so I've moved it to Draft:Little Bit of Sun. Tollens (talk) 00:14, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Sahrawi embassy, Lima
Hi, It's been a while!
As I previously mentioned on my talk page I actually visited the embassy itself after hearing that my country had severed relations with the SADR on September 8. I got to speak to the chargé d'affaires, Mr. Hamdi Sidahmed, and he agreed to an interview in a future date with the ambassador himself. I have therefore updated the ambassador list page without sources, however.
I plan to upload pictures ASAP but I would nevertheless like to know from an experienced editor such as yourself as to how I can approach this maybe? I have firsthand info but naturally I'm unable to source it, and I don't wish to add a reference that reads "This is the page author's personal experience" as it's no good really.
All the best. 180app (talk) 01:00, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, as you astutely point out, that is not an acceptable verifiable, independent, reliable source. :/ Could be great to host on Wikinews and you can certainly embed the audio in the article, but it can't be used as a source for a claim in the encyclopedia. Exciting development, tho! ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:05, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Unhelpful revert note
Hi, I see you've been doing this for awhile but adding "don't do this" to a revert on Laugh Track with no indication as to what "this" is and referring to three WP: articles that are each as long as the phone book really isn't helpful. Please be clearer in future. Thanks! --David James Young || davidjamesyoungwrites@gmail.com (talk) 04:36, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
- How would you suggest I be clearer? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:36, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
- If, for instance, someone said to you "stop doing that" and didn't explain what "that" was, you'd be confused wouldn't you? You'd like to know what "that" is so you can not do whatever "that" is. David James Young || davidjamesyoungwrites@gmail.com (talk) 04:41, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
- That doesn't answer my question. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:42, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
- Cool, man. Keep being vague and unhelpful! You're crushing it! xx David James Young || davidjamesyoungwrites@gmail.com (talk) 04:46, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
- Your point was "You're too vague". Then I asked a question and you answered the question with a question. I don't see how that is helpful. Happy to get constructive feedback, but it seems like you want to be obscure and then rude to me when I ask a simple question. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:49, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
- Cool, man. Keep being vague and unhelpful! You're crushing it! xx David James Young || davidjamesyoungwrites@gmail.com (talk) 04:46, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Jane, His Wife: does this help? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:54, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
- That doesn't answer my question. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:42, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
- If, for instance, someone said to you "stop doing that" and didn't explain what "that" was, you'd be confused wouldn't you? You'd like to know what "that" is so you can not do whatever "that" is. David James Young || davidjamesyoungwrites@gmail.com (talk) 04:41, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
ResolvedWP:ALBUMS/SOURCES
Hi, in reply to your edit summary on Laugh Track, WP:ALBUMS/SOURCES says at the top that "This list is not exhaustive. Additional websites and print sources may also be used, provided they meet the criteria at Wikipedia:Reliable sources and WP:MOSALBUM#Critical reception." So just because a site isn't listed there does not mean it can't be used. Also I'm sure Beats Per Minute has an editorial staff and all the requirements to be a reliable source. 120.17.227.247 (talk) 15:43, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
- How do you know that? If you do know that and can show me, then I'll recommend it be added to that list. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:44, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
- https://beatsperminute.com/contact/ lists its staff of multiple editors. The page you're linking to specifies just because a site isn't listed there doesn't mean it can't be used or is necessarily unreliable. 120.17.227.247 (talk) 15:52, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
- I never wrote that it was unreliable. No one said that it's unreliable: I just don't know that it is reliable. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:02, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
- https://beatsperminute.com/contact/ lists its staff of multiple editors. The page you're linking to specifies just because a site isn't listed there doesn't mean it can't be used or is necessarily unreliable. 120.17.227.247 (talk) 15:52, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Koavf,
I came across this page as the talk page was a broken redirec that I deleted. I don't understand the message on this page about it being an "unprintworthy" title. I've never seen this notice on a Wikipedia page before and wondered what it meant and whether it was warranted on a redirect. Thanks for any explanation you can provide. Liz Read! Talk! 02:53, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
- As you can see, there are over 1.5 million such redirects here. All it means is that someone publishing a print copy of Wikipedia should not include this title. Let me know if you have any other questions. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:56, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2023 disestablishments in Azerbaijan
A tag has been placed on Category:2023 disestablishments in Azerbaijan indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 22:42, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Copying from Category:Windows-only games to Category:Windows games
Why are you doing that? Category:Windows-only games is already a member of Category:Windows games. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:36, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
- "This is a non-diffusing subcategory of Category:Windows games." ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:02, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § X by Y in Z
A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § X by Y in Z on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Qwerfjkltalk 11:31, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § Category:WikiProject X members
A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § Category:WikiProject X members on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Qwerfjkltalk 09:34, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
Removal of tour dates
Hi there! I noticed you recently made an edit to the article The Record (Boygenius album) removing the list of tour dates from the relevant section. Your edit summary was only "per guidelines" with no particular guideline cited. I just wanted to check in and see what guideline you were referencing for that edit! Thanks in advance! :) P1(talk / contributions) 14:57, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
- Great question, friend. See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Album_article_style_advice#Touring and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albums/Archive_69#Inclusion_of_a_full_tour_schedule_on_an_album_when_the_tour_is_not_notable_by_itself. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:02, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
- Sweet, thank you so much! P1(talk / contributions) 17:25, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on The Unforgettable Fire
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page The Unforgettable Fire, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 22:09, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on The Unforgettable Fire
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page The Unforgettable Fire, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL" error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 22:11, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Category:American filmmakers by city has been nominated for renaming
Category:American filmmakers by city has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –Aidan721 (talk) 22:22, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
Category:American guitarists by city has been nominated for renaming
Category:American guitarists by city has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –Aidan721 (talk) 22:24, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
You're invited! Underrepresented Artists of Indiana editathon on Oct. 11
| Upcoming Indianapolis event - October 11, 2023: Indiana Under-represented Artists Edit-a-thon | ||
|---|---|---|
 |
You are invited to Herron Art Library in Herron School of Art & Design for an Under-represented Artists of Indiana Edit-a-thon—hosted by the Wikimedians of Indiana User Group with support from the Central Indiana Community Foundation. Together, new and experienced Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on under-represented Indiana based artists and art/artist organizations and groups in Indiana today, and historically.
All levels of experience are welcome! Please RSVP so we know who is coming. We hope you'll join us!
|
|
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 00:49, 5 October 2023 (UTC).)"
October 2023
Hello, I'm Fram. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Fram (talk) 16:42, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Fram: See {{in use}}. Stop harassing me or you will be reported. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:44, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Edit like everyone is supposed to instead of trying to create your own rules. You create empty pages or unsourced pages, you still add genres to categories instead of to articles, and so on. You seem to believe that the basic rules don't apply to you for some reason. Feel free to report me, but beware of the boomerang. Fram (talk) 16:47, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Show me a rule that I broke. I'll wait. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:49, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- WP:OWN, creating empty pages, removal of valid maintenance tags without addressing the issue, ...? Have you actually read the "in use" page? It is to avoid edit conflicts, not to exclude everyone else and let you do whatever you please. "If this template has been left in place for more than two hours since the last edit, you may assume the placing editor has forgotten to remove it, and you may remove it yourself." I moved the page to draft after you didn't edit the empty page for two hours. Such pages don't belong in the mainspace. Fram (talk) 16:52, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- I didn't break that rule and you never removed the template. Please be a serious person if you are going to post here and stop posting your stupid nonsense. Thanks. "removal of valid maintenance tags without addressing the issue": please stop lying, too. Thanks again. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:54, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Cf. lying. If you'd prefer that I just assume you have no idea what you're talking about, I can do that, too. Please advise on if you'd prefer an assumption of ignorance about me adding sources. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:00, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- You created an unreferenced article (well, you created an empty one, but when you did add contents, it was unsourced), and you then removed the "unreferenced" tag because you had put the "in use" template, as if that somehow invalidates that tag (again, please read the explanation of what "in use" is for). Only when I readded it did you actually provide a reference. Please stop being uncivil and posting personal attacks. Fram (talk) 17:23, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- And then what happened about 100 seconds later???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Please actually answer the question. Have you ever read the tag that says "please do not edit this page while this message is displayed"?????????????????????????????????????????? And don't act like the fact that you're "civilly" harassing me means that you're not harassing me. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:29, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- "Only when I readded it did you actually provide a reference." Add, Readd. As for the tag, in my opinion you misuse it to WP:OWN the page and avoid having to produce an acceptable article from the start, instead just dropping it in the mainspace and then editing other pages instead. Fram (talk) 17:36, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- please do not edit this page while this message is displayed No need for your original research about what you think guidelines mean: I don't care and never asked. I've created thousands of articles here, I'm not going to stop because of your harassment. Stop harassing me and do something constructive instead of offering your unsolicited nonsense. If you have nothing better to add, then just stop editing Wikipedia. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- "Only when I readded it did you actually provide a reference." Add, Readd. As for the tag, in my opinion you misuse it to WP:OWN the page and avoid having to produce an acceptable article from the start, instead just dropping it in the mainspace and then editing other pages instead. Fram (talk) 17:36, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- And then what happened about 100 seconds later???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Please actually answer the question. Have you ever read the tag that says "please do not edit this page while this message is displayed"?????????????????????????????????????????? And don't act like the fact that you're "civilly" harassing me means that you're not harassing me. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:29, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- You created an unreferenced article (well, you created an empty one, but when you did add contents, it was unsourced), and you then removed the "unreferenced" tag because you had put the "in use" template, as if that somehow invalidates that tag (again, please read the explanation of what "in use" is for). Only when I readded it did you actually provide a reference. Please stop being uncivil and posting personal attacks. Fram (talk) 17:23, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Cf. lying. If you'd prefer that I just assume you have no idea what you're talking about, I can do that, too. Please advise on if you'd prefer an assumption of ignorance about me adding sources. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:00, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- I didn't break that rule and you never removed the template. Please be a serious person if you are going to post here and stop posting your stupid nonsense. Thanks. "removal of valid maintenance tags without addressing the issue": please stop lying, too. Thanks again. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:54, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- WP:OWN, creating empty pages, removal of valid maintenance tags without addressing the issue, ...? Have you actually read the "in use" page? It is to avoid edit conflicts, not to exclude everyone else and let you do whatever you please. "If this template has been left in place for more than two hours since the last edit, you may assume the placing editor has forgotten to remove it, and you may remove it yourself." I moved the page to draft after you didn't edit the empty page for two hours. Such pages don't belong in the mainspace. Fram (talk) 16:52, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Fram, your first move I understand. But regarding the templating, I see that Koavf added the In Use template at 11:04, 12 October 2023, and you placed the tag at 14:32, 12 October 2023. The problem with your rationale about the removal after two hours is that it is if there have been no edits. But Koavf had been making edits within two hours of your unref template, up to 14:16, 12 October 2023, just few minutes before said edit of yours.
- Per Template:In use,
If this template has been left in place for more than two hours since the last edit, you may assume the placing editor has forgotten to remove it, and you may remove it yourself.
- Therefore, I consider the templating inappropriate, although the excessively colourful language (not the formatting) that Koavf used was inappropriate as well.
- I have to mention that I personally would have drafted the page first or in any case used the
{{under construction}}template. Although said template could have been used in addition to the "in use" template. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 18:04, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Show me a rule that I broke. I'll wait. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:49, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Edit like everyone is supposed to instead of trying to create your own rules. You create empty pages or unsourced pages, you still add genres to categories instead of to articles, and so on. You seem to believe that the basic rules don't apply to you for some reason. Feel free to report me, but beware of the boomerang. Fram (talk) 16:47, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Mannequin Pussy (album)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Mannequin Pussy (album), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 22:07, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Wild Wild West(Will Smith song) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 21 § Wild Wild West(Will Smith song) until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 17:44, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on ...So Unknown
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page ...So Unknown, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 05:11, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Question
Do editors with the most edits (say top 100) have a special live meeting? Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thinker78 (talk • contribs)
- If so, they didn't tell me. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:55, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Black Bayou (album)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Black Bayou (album), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 06:17, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
A Barnstar For You!
|
The Poorly Drawn Barnstar | |
| I’m sorry I misinterpreted the peace sign and TCM in your signature to assume you were a pseudoscience defending hippy |
Mach61 (talk) 03:34, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Traditional medicines sometimes has insights and can be a useful complement to contemporary medicine, but I'm all about the scientific method. Be well, friend. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:20, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Bird Machine
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Bird Machine, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 09:41, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Billy Wayne Davis
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Billy Wayne Davis requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. 24.183.96.14 (talk) 10:49, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
Lucha Reyes albums
I have added further sourcing and reverted your redirects of La Morena De Oro Del Peru and Mi Ultima Cancion. These were the debut and final albums of the legendary Peruvian singer Lucha Reyes. Despite her brief three-year recording career, ending with her premature death in 1973 at age 37, Reyes remains one of the most important recording artists in the history of Peruvian music and musica criolla/vals criollo in particular. "Regresa" was the first single from the La Morena album and became a major international hit in 1970; if you want to enjoy a pleasant three minutes, it can be heard here. ("Mi Ultima Cancion", released two months before her death, is also a good listen and can be found here.)
Unfortunately, Peruvian sources from the early 1970s are rarely digitized and are therefore difficult to access. For this reason, historic music from Peru is terribly under-represented on English Wikipedia. That said, I have now added sourcing (including sources taken from the Spanish Wikipedia article here) that demonstrate the importance of these two albums. Rather than eliminating content in these under-represented cultural areas, we should endeavor to expand and improve our coverage of these topics. If you find other Peruvian music articles that are in need of improvement, feel free to ping me and I'll do my best to help. Cheers! Cbl62 (talk) 16:15, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Everything that has sources is important. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:59, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. I hope you enjoy the song links. Ping me if you find other South American music articles that need improved sourcing. Cbl62 (talk) 00:44, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Beneath the Eyrie
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Beneath the Eyrie, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL" error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 05:59, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Captions for certifications
Hi there! I noticed your captions on certification tables and wanted to let you know that the RIAA and a lot of other certifying bodies around the world actually certify music based on shipments so it's not accurate to call them "sales certifications", we just drop the "sales" part I've noticed. The footer of the certification table explains what each country's is based off of. 120.17.52.205 (talk) 02:16, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. You'll note for one of the newer ones, I've included streaming units. It seems confusing what these certifications are even "certifying". ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:20, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- The footer notes explain what the symbols next to each figure means and what each certificate is based off. Trying to explain all of the methods in the caption probably makes it more complex than captions are supposed to be. 120.17.52.205 (talk) 02:29, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- I'm no expert in the matter, just going off what i've seen editors like muhandes and ss112 say. (And some more i'm forgetting) 120.17.52.205 (talk) 02:32, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- For sure. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:33, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- I'm no expert in the matter, just going off what i've seen editors like muhandes and ss112 say. (And some more i'm forgetting) 120.17.52.205 (talk) 02:32, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- The footer notes explain what the symbols next to each figure means and what each certificate is based off. Trying to explain all of the methods in the caption probably makes it more complex than captions are supposed to be. 120.17.52.205 (talk) 02:29, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Smoking Popes compilation albums
A tag has been placed on Category:Smoking Popes compilation albums indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 12:07, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Assassinated government ministers
Hi Koavf. If you are interested, the subcategories of Category:Assassinated government ministers are in need of getting populated. Cheers! Thinker78 (talk) 21:41, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. Could be up my alley. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:47, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
It appears that template has two modes, see Template:Album chart#Manual referencing. I'm guessing you were intending to edit the non-manual mode versions of all the possible refs, but edited the manual-mode versions instead.
The non-manual mode versions all don't even use cite templates, they look something like {{#tag:ref|[https://www.billboard.com/artist/{{#invoke:WLink|ansiPercent|{{#invoke:String|replace|{{{artist}}}|&|%26}}|space=-}}/chart-history/digital-albums "{{{artist}}} Chart History (Digital Albums)"].{{dead link|date=October 2023}} [[Billboard (magazine)|''Billboard'']]. {{#if:{{{publish-date|{{{publishdate|}}}}}}|{{{publish-date|{{{publishdate}}}}}}. }} {{#if:{{{access-date|{{{accessdate|}}}}}}| Retrieved {{{access-date|{{{accessdate}}}}}}. }}|name={{#if:{{{refname|}}}|{{{refname}}}|"ac_{{{1|}}}_{{{artist|}}}"}}|group={{#if:{{{refgroup|}}}| "{{{refgroup}}}"}}}} in the later part of the lines. Anomie⚔ 00:12, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. That's so helpful. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:24, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
IFL Teams table
I checked the link you sent me, and there's nothing at all which suggests your new format is more "accessible." In fact, being right-handed, I tend to look for the conference names on the left first, so moving them to the right actual makes it less accessible to me.
Would you mind explaining why your new format is better than my old one? Tom Danson (talk) 20:43, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
- Because it has a table caption, semantics for rows and columns, and it doesn't abuse rowspans for internal headings. I don't even understand what you mean by it being less accessible: all of these are Web accessibility requirements, which are clearly outlined at MOS:TABLECAPTION and MOS:COLHEAD. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:39, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
- Just when you make your changes put the conference column in the left, not the right. The right looks bad and makes no sense. oknazevad (talk) 17:18, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- Okay. It's usually nice to put the scope in the far left, but not necessary. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:11, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- Just when you make your changes put the conference column in the left, not the right. The right looks bad and makes no sense. oknazevad (talk) 17:18, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
Universalist church of america
The citation is not complete. It needs: author, article title, and it's useful to include full pages for the article, if it's an article being cited, instead of just one. deisenbe (talk) 13:17, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- If it has those things, sure. Does this? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:11, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Legerdemain (album)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Legerdemain (album), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 07:02, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Sahrawi people by ethnic or national origin indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:06, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
Happy Birthday!
 | Happy birthday! Hi Koavf! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy birthday! Enjoy this special day! The Herald (Benison) (talk) 03:54, 18 November 2023 (UTC) |  |
- <3 :3 <3 ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:55, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Albums arranged by Billy Blyers has been nominated for merging
Category:Albums arranged by Billy Blyers has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 08:34, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Look Over the Wall, See the Sky
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Look Over the Wall, See the Sky, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 11:53, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Albums produced by Alesso has been nominated for deletion
Category:Albums produced by Alesso has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 13:35, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Neo (Hungarian band) albums
A tag has been placed on Category:Neo (Hungarian band) albums indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 21:26, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
Antifa
Is there a reason why you didn 't use your edit summary to say where it was discussed? I did look before I reverted. Doug Weller talk 11:59, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, because I inserted the file in a relevant section. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:19, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- Not a good reason given the disclaimer you ignored. Doug Weller talk 13:31, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- I have no clue what you're rambling about and your first edit summary was untrue. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:09, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- Rambling? So no AgF. Maybe I was wrong, but didn't you notice you were reverted about 3 hours ago? I want you to show me where it's in the article, please, so I can find out what I did wrong. It's a reasonable request, especially for an article under discretionary sanctions. If I'm wrong I want to know why. Doug Weller talk 16:36, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- I assumed good faith, you just aren't making sense. Where what is in the article? You keep on using "it" without defining that "it" is. Do you see how that's confusing? The first thing you wrote was "Not discussed in article". What wasn't??? The document itself? The FBI's association of antifa with terrorism? It's not me not assuming good faith if you can't be bothered to write a full sentence... ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:43, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- You added a picture of a pamphlet. I reverted you saying it wasn't discussed in the article. It never occurred to me that you wouldn't realise it was the pamphlet. And the 2nd revert of your post showed that that editor thought it was also. Doug Weller talk 17:13, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- Forgot, why didn't you ask me that question earlier? Doug Weller talk 17:13, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- What? Now you are asking a question to yourself... We don't have to have the literal piece of media discussed in the text of the article to add media. That isn't a thing. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:35, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- Forgot, why didn't you ask me that question earlier? Doug Weller talk 17:13, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- You added a picture of a pamphlet. I reverted you saying it wasn't discussed in the article. It never occurred to me that you wouldn't realise it was the pamphlet. And the 2nd revert of your post showed that that editor thought it was also. Doug Weller talk 17:13, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- I assumed good faith, you just aren't making sense. Where what is in the article? You keep on using "it" without defining that "it" is. Do you see how that's confusing? The first thing you wrote was "Not discussed in article". What wasn't??? The document itself? The FBI's association of antifa with terrorism? It's not me not assuming good faith if you can't be bothered to write a full sentence... ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:43, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- Rambling? So no AgF. Maybe I was wrong, but didn't you notice you were reverted about 3 hours ago? I want you to show me where it's in the article, please, so I can find out what I did wrong. It's a reasonable request, especially for an article under discretionary sanctions. If I'm wrong I want to know why. Doug Weller talk 16:36, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- I have no clue what you're rambling about and your first edit summary was untrue. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:09, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- Not a good reason given the disclaimer you ignored. Doug Weller talk 13:31, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
Without first having seen this discussion, I came here to warn you about what seemed a deliberately unhelpful edit summary here: "It _is_ discussed in the article, User:Doug Weller". You couldn't quote a few words from the putative discussion in the article, to help people find it? Of course I now see above that you not only wouldn't explain in the edit summary, but you also won't help Doug find it even when he comes here to ask. Instead, you decide that the "it" you yourself were the first to refer to (5 hours earlier) has become quite unclear, and say "You just aren't making sense. Where what is in the article? You keep on using "it" without defining that "it" is. Do you see how that's confusing?" You're trolling, Justin. One more piece of that, or one more rudeness to a fellow editor, and I'll block you from Antifa (United States). Bishonen | tålk 21:59, 23 November 2023 (UTC).
- No I'm not. Go away with your baseless allegation. The more I think about this, the more outrageous it is. Are you even being serious now? What do you purport is "trolling" here? Doug left semi-literate edit summaries that made no sense to me: that's a fact. He even comes here and writes half-formed sentences and writes responses to himself asking himself questions: it's not comprehensible to me. I added a completely valid and germane piece of media to a page. Nothing about that deserves a block. And now I have users coming here writing completely untrue allegations like I'm not assuming good faith (???) or that I'm "trolling" when all I'm doing is adding relevant media and someone else is writing things that I cannot understand. Is this a joke? Also, for what it's worth, I'm not interested in editing that article any more and I'm 100% not trying to reinsert that PDF, so I'm struggling to understand what the purpose is of this threat. If you think I'm rude to Doug, whatever, I think he's being wildly rude to me, but I have no interest in dragging this out or making some complaint to someone else for his anti-social behavior. I gave up on trying to add the media when two users objected and it's been placed in several other relevant articles where no one else had these objections. I sincerely have no clue what is going on here, what Doug is trying to say with his half-formed sentences, or why you are trying to block me from an article that I'm not editing. Thoroughly bizarre. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:46, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- It's best to use as few adjectives, characterizations or colorful metaphors as possible. Some epistemological lines of inquiry are poorly seen in the community. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 06:27, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- Okay? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:43, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- The trolling was where the it that you yourself were the first to use had over the course of 5 hours become obscure and you said "You keep on using 'it' without defining that 'it' is". If you don't know where the rudeness is, try "rambling", "you just aren't making sense", "confusing", "you can't be bothered to write a full sentence", which you double down on in your reply to me ("semi-literate", really?). You have been page-blocked from Antifa (United States) for one month. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bishonen | tålk 08:51, 24 November 2023 (UTC).- It was not trolling and you evidently didn't even read what I wrote. Don't post here if you're not going to read what I write. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:52, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- It's best to use as few adjectives, characterizations or colorful metaphors as possible. Some epistemological lines of inquiry are poorly seen in the community. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 06:27, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
Koavf (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
vindictive, unnecessary block imposed by an admin abusing his powers. There is no need for this block, it serves no purpose, and I explicitly said that I wasn't even planning on editing the article. This is completely ridiculous on the part of User:Bishonen and is explicitly what Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Purpose_and_goals says to not do: it does not serve the purposes stated for blocks and in fact, is purely vidinctive abuse. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:53, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I agree that you were rude towards Doug so in that regard the block was correct and I don't think it was vindictive, but much of the problematic comments were on this page with only your problematic edit summary on the Antifa US article being elsewhere(I think) so unless I'm missing something(certainly possible) I'm not certain that a par-block from that article was the best way to address it. However, you say you have no plans to edit that article, so I see no need to remove it. If your plans change, let us know. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 09:16, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
- @331dot: You are not missing anything: I did nothing wrong or disruptive on that article and there is no reason to block me from it. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:22, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- I don't really have anything else to add. You can certainly request unblock again to see if someone else is willing to remove the par-block from an article you have no intention of editing. It just seems unnecessary to me. 331dot (talk) 09:26, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- Sure, I appreciate your time and respect your perspective. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:28, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- I don't really have anything else to add. You can certainly request unblock again to see if someone else is willing to remove the par-block from an article you have no intention of editing. It just seems unnecessary to me. 331dot (talk) 09:26, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
Koavf (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Per above. Nothing inappropriate occurred on that page and the block is just to be punitive and it serves no purpose. This is abuse of admin powers and said admin only got involved to escalate things here and keep on antagonizing with false claims. There is no content dispute and the other person involved stopped responding awhile ago, so this is just User:Bishonen being vengeful, in opposition to the purpose for blocks. (Note that if another admin declines, I will just archive this entire talk page).
Accept reason:
Procedural accept: Block has now expired. --Blablubbs (talk) 18:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- You said "for what it's worth, I'm not interested in editing that article any more", which certainly wasn't a formal undertaking not to edit the article any more, and hardly made my block unnecessary. Because why wouldn't your interest be re-ignited at some (any) point? But I suppose a shorter sitewide block for trolling and personal attacks might have been more logical. I can convert the page block to a 48-hour site block if you prefer, Justin. Bishonen | tålk 09:39, 24 November 2023 (UTC).
- I would prefer you to stop posting here, as you make it a point to escalate things and are being rude to me. Stop it. The above comment is actually trolling and being rude and time-wasting. You are not doing anything constructive posting here, but instead just badgering, harassing, and serially threatening me, without reading what I write. I sincerely doubt that you believe that something constructive is supposed to come from these talk page posts or that you think that blocking me from that page is anything other than punitive. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:40, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
Koavf, as a regular unblock reviewer, I frankly think this request is beyond the scope of unblock reviews. I'm not trying to speak for all reviewers but I suspect I speak for most. Normally, I'd recommend you take your request to the blocking admin, as this is just a partial block. I politely suggest that path won't work here. Therefore, I'd like to point you to WP:AARV. That venue would be appropriate if you think the block was done against policy. It's not the right venue if you think the block was consistent with policy but another course of action would have been more optimal. I want to be very clear, you should read the purpose of the review process outlined at WP:AARV before deciding if that's the right venue. It's entirely reasonable for you to decide that is not the right venue. Also note that me suggesting this to you does not mean others will agree with my suggestion, though you are very welcome to quote my claim that this is beyond the scope of unblock reviews. You are under no obligation whatsoever to agree with me or to follow my suggestion and if you wish, you are free to remove my suggestion from your talk page without even commenting on it. --Yamla (talk) 19:07, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- Your feedback is respected and appreciated. Thanks kindly. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:40, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- WP:XRV is pretty much completely dead, so if you want to break the ice a little, I would be glad to post there myself -- I've been an administrator for a few weeks and would appreciate getting a review of the actions I've taken thus far (if anyone is willing to indulge me). If it makes you feel more comfortable about opening a thread there I'd be glad to type somethijng up and post it. jp×g🗯️ 23:18, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'll see if there's any response to the above request and measure if it's worthwhile. I appreciate everyone's feedback here. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:25, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Yamla@JPxG Note that Koavf rejected the option of a 48 hour block "for trolling and personal attacks". Doug Weller talk 12:25, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- I didn't exactly reject it as much as I ignored it: I didn't even think it was a serious proposal. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
Response to attacks by Koavf
Koavf wrote that "? Doug left semi-literate edit summaries that made no sense to me: that's a fact. He even comes here and writes half-formed sentences and writes responses to himself asking himself questions: it's not comprehensible to me."
My edit summary was "Not discussed in article, evidently not live as "in the vault". I'm pretty sure I'm not semi-literate. I did assume that Koavf had actually looked at the link in the source before posting, and saw that it clearly says "https://vault.fbi.gov" which suggested to me it wasn't currently on the FBI website. He could have asked me what I meant but didn't. His reinstatement was "It _is_ discussed in the article". User:Objective3000 reverted it and argued on the talk page that the caption added by Koavf, “A 2021 pamphlet developed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation correlates antifa symbolism and slogans with domestic terrorism”" was "be highly misleading and rather the opposite of much of the section text." In addition it wasn't "summaries" as I only made one edit summary. I think there's a bit of irony there.
I don't see what was rambling about anything I said, nor do I see where I wrote at least two "half-formed" sentences. I have no idea why I was told I wasn't making any sense. I was also told " We don't have to have the literal piece of media discussed in the text of the article to add media." But not only is that not always accurate, it was the caption he added that was the problem, and that would have needed discussion IMHO.
I admit the awful sin of choosing to add a comment by simply hitting reply to myself rather than editing the whole section. It never occurred to me he would think I was asking myself instead of him and in any case he did respond so he knew I wasn't. I'll leave it to others to judge if I was, as claimed, " being wildly rude" to him. Doug Weller talk 13:00, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Doug, I, for one, have no trouble understanding your posts or edit summaries. In fact, I consider your questions about the original edit and your subsequent comments on point, and wish that they had been responded to with the same congeniality and respect. – bradv 18:36, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Bradv Thanks, much appreciated. Doug Weller talk 18:42, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- See below. I cannot understand him. If you can actually answer those questions, I would love that. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:31, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- What on Earth is this? I wrote above what the confusion is and you never answered it. Look at what you wrote:
- "Rambling? So no AgF." What no AgF? Where is a lack of an assumption of good faith on display? Have you read WP:AGF? Does that page say something about how if Person A is unintelligible, therefore Person B is not acting in good faith? Complete nonsense.
- "Maybe I was wrong, but didn't you notice you were reverted about 3 hours ago?" I did notice that. Did you notice that I dropped it and moved on? Why are you bringing this up? How does it in any way respond to what I wrote?
- "I want you to show me where it's in the article, please" WHAT IS "IT"? WHAT DO YOU MEAN? (And I'm "trolling" when I ask you to define "it" when you bring it up. Completely preposterous.)
- "so I can find out what I did wrong" I never wrote that you did anything wrong.
- "It's a reasonable request" It isn't because I CANNOT UNDERSTAND YOU.
- Etc.
- And then you don't actually answer my question above and instead come back a couple of days later to start a new thread on my talk page directed at... Whom? Is this how you communicate in real life? I cannot understand you or why you are acting this way. This is all in addition to the fact that the piece of media I added was removed and there is no actual content dispute anymore. There is nothing to discuss about the article, so what are you trying to accomplish Doug? I'm looking forward to you just ignoring these questions and writing things like "Forgot, why didn't you ask me that question earlier?" (What question?! Where?!) ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:31, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- I have no idea why you're having such trouble with this, other than that you may be acting deliberately obtuse. You posted an image of a pamphlet that was not discussed in the article, with a clearly untrue caption (it contradicts the FBI's own disclaimer in the image). When Doug challenged your edit and asked you about it on your talk page, you accused him of "rambling". At no point did you take an opportunity to defend, explain, or retract your edit, all of which would have been mature responses, but you continued to resort to rude and ad hominem attacks. Multiple people have pointed this out to you, and yet you persist. I urge you to read WP:AVOIDUNCIVIL and consider if you could have handled things differently. – bradv 19:55, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- And you wrote this in response to something I wrote to Doug and didn't respond to the comment I actually directed at you. This thread should not exist and is a waste of time on Doug's part. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:24, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- I have no idea why you're having such trouble with this, other than that you may be acting deliberately obtuse. You posted an image of a pamphlet that was not discussed in the article, with a clearly untrue caption (it contradicts the FBI's own disclaimer in the image). When Doug challenged your edit and asked you about it on your talk page, you accused him of "rambling". At no point did you take an opportunity to defend, explain, or retract your edit, all of which would have been mature responses, but you continued to resort to rude and ad hominem attacks. Multiple people have pointed this out to you, and yet you persist. I urge you to read WP:AVOIDUNCIVIL and consider if you could have handled things differently. – bradv 19:55, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
ResolvedSpiritual Cramp
Hi i just wanted to let you know the article you're working on has existed for three weeks at Spiritual Cramp (album). 120.17.30.212 (talk) 12:33, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- So helpful. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:34, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- I merged them. Thanks for saving me time--very considerate. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:47, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Neo (Hungarian band) albums has been nominated for deletion
Category:Neo (Hungarian band) albums has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 19:09, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Soul albums by Lebanese artists
A tag has been placed on Category:Soul albums by Lebanese artists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 19:49, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Rhythm and blues albums by Lebanese artists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 02:51, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Lucky for You
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Lucky for You, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 15:54, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Cousin (album)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Cousin (album), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 15:56, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Hackney Diamonds
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Hackney Diamonds, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 15:58, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Life Under the Gun
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Life Under the Gun, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:00, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on This Stupid World
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page This Stupid World, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:02, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Everyone's Crushed
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Everyone's Crushed, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:03, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on The Record (Boygenius album)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page The Record (Boygenius album), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:05, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Trouble Is a Lonesome Town, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Interlude.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
Category:Mauritanian people by period has been nominated for merging
Category:Mauritanian people by period has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 06:29, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
Pitchfork “media”
I see you reverted all my recent edits. Pitchfork Media is no longer the name of the website (which is just pitchfork) and not the name of the company that owns the website (which is Conde Nast). The Pitchfork article states “formerly Pitchfork Media”. It is therefore not accurate to refer to Pitchfork as Pitchfork Media. Whotookthatguy (talk) 23:14, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, so why did you link to "Pitchfork" repeatedly? How is that an improvement? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:09, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- I just changed the already existing links to say Pitchfork instead of Pitchfork Media. The improvement is that it’s the correct name of the website. Whotookthatguy (talk) 05:36, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- You took a functional link and changed it to one that directs readers to a piece of agricultural and gardening equipment. That is not an improvement. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:17, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, I understand now! I will change the links to accurately link to the "Pitchfork (website)" article. Whotookthatguy (talk) 14:10, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thumbs up emoji. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:41, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, I understand now! I will change the links to accurately link to the "Pitchfork (website)" article. Whotookthatguy (talk) 14:10, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- You took a functional link and changed it to one that directs readers to a piece of agricultural and gardening equipment. That is not an improvement. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:17, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- I just changed the already existing links to say Pitchfork instead of Pitchfork Media. The improvement is that it’s the correct name of the website. Whotookthatguy (talk) 05:36, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Theo was here
Hey Theobegley2013 (talk) 00:23, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- Dunh, Dunh, DUNH!!!!!!!!111ONE ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:40, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Untitled
Hi. Re Living in a Ghost Town, Oxford does state that criticise is the British English form and criticize the US form. As someone who has lived in the UK for 60 years, I can confirm that is the case. Neilinabbey (talk) 11:00, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- But https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/criticize ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:54, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- That page clearly states 'British English, also criticise" and the OED here - https://www.oed.com/dictionary/criticize_v?tab=factsheet#7820897 - clearly states criticise is British English, criticize is US English. Neilinabbey (talk) 12:12, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- I would also respectfully suggest that as someone who has lived and worked in the UK all his 60 years and works regularly with the OED, I perhaps know UK English better than someone in the US who is seeing what the dictionary says but not necessarily in the context of the English used in the UK. The OED is not the only authority and is sometimes seen as quite idiosyncratic, as it follows certain forms, such as the Oxford comma, that other dictionaries reject and which are widely seen as American and not generally used in British English. The -ize ending for words is another such example, as -ise is the widely used and preferred form, even though both are correct. Kind regards, Neilinabbey (talk) 12:20, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Spelling/Words ending with "-ise" or "-ize". No one is claiming that the OED is the only authority: this is just the version of English used on this article. See MOS:VAR and MOS:RETAIN. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:32, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- You are missing the point - the OED accepts BOTH versions of the word. As the Wikipedia MOS also states that consistency should be used within articles (and the rest of this article uses British English) and also states that articles with a tie to a specific country - and a song by a British band is clearly tied to the UK - should use the style of that country, which is criticise. My edits are therefore entirely in keeping with the MOS. Neilinabbey (talk) 12:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- Since OED accepts BOTH then "criticize" is British English. Please stop rambling on my talk page and wasting my time. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:05, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- You have already been partially blocked for rudeness - keep talking to people like that and you'll find yourself blocked further.
- I am not rambling, I am trying to explain to you that in the UK, despite the fact that criticized is permitted, the more widely accepted and preferred word is criticised. You should show some respect to non-US cultures and learn to discuss disagreements on a more mature way instead of just insulting others in such an unhelpful and juvenile fashion. I'll drop it for now as you have changed the word completely, but any more unnecessary rudeness from you and you'll be reported.Neilinabbey (talk) 15:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- Stop. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:55, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- Wait a minute. Fill my cup, put some liquor in it! Panini! • 🥪 23:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
- Stop. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:55, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- Since OED accepts BOTH then "criticize" is British English. Please stop rambling on my talk page and wasting my time. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:05, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- You are missing the point - the OED accepts BOTH versions of the word. As the Wikipedia MOS also states that consistency should be used within articles (and the rest of this article uses British English) and also states that articles with a tie to a specific country - and a song by a British band is clearly tied to the UK - should use the style of that country, which is criticise. My edits are therefore entirely in keeping with the MOS. Neilinabbey (talk) 12:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Spelling/Words ending with "-ise" or "-ize". No one is claiming that the OED is the only authority: this is just the version of English used on this article. See MOS:VAR and MOS:RETAIN. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:32, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- I would also respectfully suggest that as someone who has lived and worked in the UK all his 60 years and works regularly with the OED, I perhaps know UK English better than someone in the US who is seeing what the dictionary says but not necessarily in the context of the English used in the UK. The OED is not the only authority and is sometimes seen as quite idiosyncratic, as it follows certain forms, such as the Oxford comma, that other dictionaries reject and which are widely seen as American and not generally used in British English. The -ize ending for words is another such example, as -ise is the widely used and preferred form, even though both are correct. Kind regards, Neilinabbey (talk) 12:20, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- That page clearly states 'British English, also criticise" and the OED here - https://www.oed.com/dictionary/criticize_v?tab=factsheet#7820897 - clearly states criticise is British English, criticize is US English. Neilinabbey (talk) 12:12, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Category:Mauritanian actors by century has been nominated for merging
Category:Mauritanian actors by century has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 16:49, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Category:Mauritanian people by century and occupation has been nominated for merging
Category:Mauritanian people by century and occupation has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 16:51, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Hit Records (Croatia) albums
A tag has been placed on Category:Hit Records (Croatia) albums indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 14:47, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Lana Jurčević albums
A tag has been placed on Category:Lana Jurčević albums indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 14:47, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Albums produced by Milana Vlaović
A tag has been placed on Category:Albums produced by Milana Vlaović indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 14:47, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Andre Braugher
Why are you citing WP:OR while removing the awards section? Citations are certainly needed, but there is no suggestion of original research here. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 03:48, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- Because I don't even know if reliable sources exists for some of these claims. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:56, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- Careful about 3RR please. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 04:00, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- One of the explicit exemptions at WP:3RR is for biographies of living persons and that page explicitly says that it applies to the recently deceased as well: Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Recently_dead_or_probably_dead. I am allowed to "Remov[e]... poorly sourced [material] according to Wikipedia's biographies of living persons (BLP) policy". ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:03, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- For awards that he won and for which he was nominated? No, that's not a 3RR exception under BLP, in my view. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 04:05, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- It's completely unsourced material. Please remove it and respond to the posts I made at WP:AIV or WP:BLPN, ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:08, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- No. It's not completely unsourced. For example, if you click through to Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama Series, sources support the nomination. Of course, citations ideally need to be on the page, but I don't think you are justified in the edit warring. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 04:14, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- Citations at a secondary page are not citations at that page. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:28, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- Agreed. Clearly, though, you and I disagree about what justifies the wholesale removal of an "Awards and nominations" section. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 04:33, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- WP:BLP explicitly states that challenged material should not be readded without inline citations. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:35, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- Inline citations need to be added, yes. But I don't get why you believe this was worth challenging in the first place. Or edit warred about it. Or accused the IP of vandalism for restoring the list of awards and nominations. Or forum shopped about it. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 04:41, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- Because all information needs citations, particularly that which is about biographies of living persons. I also didn't forum shop: I posted to the places I was directed to post to. I typically wouldn't have posted to WP:BLPN and never have as far as I can recall. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:56, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- Inline citations need to be added, yes. But I don't get why you believe this was worth challenging in the first place. Or edit warred about it. Or accused the IP of vandalism for restoring the list of awards and nominations. Or forum shopped about it. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 04:41, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- WP:BLP explicitly states that challenged material should not be readded without inline citations. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:35, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- Agreed. Clearly, though, you and I disagree about what justifies the wholesale removal of an "Awards and nominations" section. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 04:33, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- Citations at a secondary page are not citations at that page. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:28, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- No. It's not completely unsourced. For example, if you click through to Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama Series, sources support the nomination. Of course, citations ideally need to be on the page, but I don't think you are justified in the edit warring. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 04:14, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- It's completely unsourced material. Please remove it and respond to the posts I made at WP:AIV or WP:BLPN, ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:08, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- For awards that he won and for which he was nominated? No, that's not a 3RR exception under BLP, in my view. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 04:05, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- One of the explicit exemptions at WP:3RR is for biographies of living persons and that page explicitly says that it applies to the recently deceased as well: Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Recently_dead_or_probably_dead. I am allowed to "Remov[e]... poorly sourced [material] according to Wikipedia's biographies of living persons (BLP) policy". ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:03, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- Careful about 3RR please. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 04:00, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Mazi Melesa Pilip
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Mazi Melesa Pilip, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 17:22, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:New wave albums by Hungarian artists
A tag has been placed on Category:New wave albums by Hungarian artists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 17:54, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Mauritanian people by occupation and century indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 03:56, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Gwar - The New Dark Ages cover artist
Hi, I see you keep deleting the cover artist's name in the wiki. Is there any valid reason why you're against it? Every album wiki credits the cover artists, especially when it's as elaborate and visually striking as this Alex Horley's. Krisfrosz133 (talk) 13:25, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- I didn't delete it. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:26, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- You did. It clearly shows in the edit history. Krisfrosz133 (talk) 01:01, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
- I clearly did not.
- Go to The New Dark Ages
- Ctrl+F
- "Alex Horley"
- I'm proven correct.
- ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:19, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
- I clearly did not.
- You did. It clearly shows in the edit history. Krisfrosz133 (talk) 01:01, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Good faith comment
Hi Justin, thanks for your comment. You know, I've always had positive associations with your username. But whoa, have I deserved such an arbitrary lecture? "Please pay more attention to what you are doing"? "Confounding and weird"? This is unfair, at least. As a philosopher, I'm sure you're aware it is. Anyway, out of respect to you and your efforts around here, here are my doubts following your comment.
- Reference errors? Where have I bombed errors in Aiir (EP)? Thought I improved the refs here, not spoiled. It's there in the diffs. I wouldn't mind you re-entered them.
- I've got rid of nbsps because for me they always seem out of place in prose. Plus, apparently the Visual Editor removes some of them. I never use them. Don't mind. Don't care.
Other than that, happy holidays! — Kochas 02:48, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
- I didn't think that "please pay more attention" constituted a lecture. You're telling me that when you look at this rev, you don't see any reference erros? I don't see how that's possible. You can clearly see them, just like how you can clearly see that this article uses list-defined references and then you didn't use that style and instead inserted duplicates of the existing references in the body of the article. It's just very bizarre and sloppy. Nobody's perfect--certainly not me--but this kind of edit is just so weird that I don't understand what motivates it. And non-breaking spaces are made for prose! That's the whole point. It's nice that you've had positive associations with me and I hope you still do, but I also hope you can see why what you did was weird and unhelpful to at least some measure. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:22, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
- Granted, I haven't noticed the errors (still, they had left over after my edit, not that I made them), I just forgot to switch all the leftover original refs, since I'm planning to contribute some more to articles related to the band in question.
- The simple answer to all this what you're saying is that I use MediaWiki's VisualEditor. And I never add references manually or in any manual shape or form, including listed refs. I wouldn't be editing articles should I had to put any code-like syntax in the first place! Like I had in the very early days of Wikipedia. That includes the automatically references-generating tool that's available by default for ten years now (from what I've double-checked in the article just now).
- So since one can't preview any source-mode references in the VisualEditor, every time I'm editing long-untouched articles I most likely turn the code-made refs, or bare URLs for that matter, into VE-generated refs that everyone could see while they're editing after me. Well, I know raw code referencing is still an acceptable way of inserting refs, but for me, a humanist not a coder, it's ridiculous [put shrugging emoji here].
- Anyway, I really appreciate your answer. — Kochas 19:15, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
- For sure, and I also appreciate your answers and perspective. I've hardly touched the VisualEditor, so whenever I hear about it, it's bewildering to me. Thanks for all you do here and for your feedback. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:18, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
- A strong life-sparing suggestion! I really recommend the read here.
- Who knows, maybe you'd give yourself a holiday present with this new perspective? — Kochas 19:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thoroughly appreciated: any time someone encourages me to dispel my ignorance, I am grateful. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:27, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
- For sure, and I also appreciate your answers and perspective. I've hardly touched the VisualEditor, so whenever I hear about it, it's bewildering to me. Thanks for all you do here and for your feedback. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:18, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
 | |
| Six years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:33, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
- A good 2024 to you and yours, G. <3 ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:16, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
two different schemes
What do you mean by " two different schemes" in your reverts? Because I literally don't know what you're trying to convey [2] Mason (talk) 22:02, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
- Cf. e.g. Category:Albums by artist and Category:Albums by artist nationality. The former is a listing of all albums by the artist and the latter is groupings by the artist's nationality. Since having a name is not a subset of having a nationality or vice versa, one does not diffuse the other: they are just two separate ways to categorize works, by either the name or the nationality of who made the creative work. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:04, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Mason (talk) 04:05, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- For sure. Thanks for all you do as well. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:15, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Mason (talk) 04:05, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
Seasonal greetings!!
|
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2024! |
|
Hello Koavf, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2024. Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:37, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- Same to you and more of it. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:15, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
.jpg)
Well, the New Year is almost upon us once again.
Wishing my very special wikifriend Koavf a happy Public Domain Day and a fantastic 2024.
I'm starting a new (and well paid) teaching job in Linkou, New Taipei City on 2 January, so you can wish me good luck with that.
Cheers! Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 07:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- I certainly do wish that. May it be a fruitful and safe year for you and yours, friend. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:15, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Pist.On albums
A tag has been placed on Category:Pist.On albums indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 04:42, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. —Bagumba (talk) 09:51, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
December 2023
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 12:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)Koavf (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I did not break WP:3RR and I did not revert more than three times. I started a discussion on this very topic that involved other editors and per WP:BRD, removing content that has been here for years requires consensus. I would like to be unblocked so I can discuss this topic constructively.
Decline reason:
The 3RR rule is not the sole definition of edit warring. Repeatedly inserting the same link across multiple articles is edit warring. RegentsPark (comment) 15:59, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
- Am I under some other kinds of editing restrictions than anyone else? I discussed this link and left the discussion open for a month to get feedback. I have only undone the removal that occurred on pages that had this link for a long time or that had a discussion that it was a potentially valid link. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- You can't use "not 3RR" as an unblock reason because you've been blocked for edit warring. Your reason should explain why your multiple reverts were not edit warring. See WP:EW for exceptions. RegentsPark (comment) 16:11, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Justin, please read WP:ELBURDEN. The rule isn't especially well known, but for ==External links==, if someone objects to a link, then the link stays out until there is a consensus to include it. The usual accepted evidence of consensus is a discussion on the individual article's talk page, in which editors agree that this particular link is wanted in this particular article. A discussion about the general merits or demerits of a large site (e.g., the discussion you started at Wikipedia talk:External links#Curlie as spam) is not generally considered sufficient, because Curlie might be generally desirable (and never spam) without their page for a given subject being any good at all. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Very helpful. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Justin, please read WP:ELBURDEN. The rule isn't especially well known, but for ==External links==, if someone objects to a link, then the link stays out until there is a consensus to include it. The usual accepted evidence of consensus is a discussion on the individual article's talk page, in which editors agree that this particular link is wanted in this particular article. A discussion about the general merits or demerits of a large site (e.g., the discussion you started at Wikipedia talk:External links#Curlie as spam) is not generally considered sufficient, because Curlie might be generally desirable (and never spam) without their page for a given subject being any good at all. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- You can't use "not 3RR" as an unblock reason because you've been blocked for edit warring. Your reason should explain why your multiple reverts were not edit warring. See WP:EW for exceptions. RegentsPark (comment) 16:11, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Koavf (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
@Bbb23 and RegentsPark: Per Boing... below and after having read Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks, there is some poor judgement, bad impulse control, or otherwise unacceptable interpretation of policy on my part. As per Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks, I understand what I are blocked for, am offering a plan to make sure that I will not do it again, and will continue to make productive contributions instead; I cannot be a constructive member of the community if I edit like I have been, so instead of leaving it up to any amount of interpretation about 3RR or "is [x] really vandalism?", etc on my part. I'd like to propose this objective standard for a self-imposed restriction if unblocked: for one year, I would not undo, revert, rollback, or otherwise edit to remove someone else's contributions (i.e. no kind of "stealth undo" to edit out someone else's work while doing other edits) on any page (main namespace, template, etc.) except for my user page and user talk. This includes obvious vandalism, style issues, etc. I will only ask for someone else to provide a perspective or gain consensus or ask that user to revert. After that, an indefinite 1RR that would mean I would only have one revert on any piece of content, including vandalism, etc. until such time as an uninvolved admin or the community thinks that I've shown good judgement about when to undo/revert/etc. I am hopeful this would be acceptable and would make it so that there is no ambiguity or interpretation for me and my poor skills in determining if I am responsible for an edit war or using undoing/reverting/etc. as a method of escalating disagreements on-wiki. I would also like to volunteer to provide third party opinions on disputes: at least one a week for the next year so I can better help diffuse any on-wiki tension, work thru disputes, and give myself better perspective. I would hope that my history in editing would be of service to others and it could be of service to me as well. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:25, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
Accept reason:
See below
- FWIW, I can support an unblock on this basis. I expect some people will ask when enough is enough and how many chances an editor should get, and I can fully understand that. But, I still think having Justin back will be a significant net positive to the project.
Also, and this is not actually a proposal but just some idle thoughts - Justin seems to get a bit intense and lose his judgment from time to time (and I doubt he'd disagree with that). If we just blocked him for a fixed period whenever it happened, to give him time to get his thoughts back in order, I think we'd still be better off with him than without. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:38, 30 December 2023 (UTC)- Losing judgment seems to underplay the issues. Koavf was unblocked based on a stated promise not to edit war and to use dispute resolution processes. In addition to the two blocks since then (one from two simultaneous AN3 reports), they have also made things up in an edit summary and used protection gaming to lock in their edits and avoid dispute resolution processes. These appear to be active choices made in spite of what was said in the last (non-procedural) successful unblock request. There is nothing in the above unblock request that suggests it will be treated differently. CMD (talk) 03:37, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- Excuse me: I was mistaken about that and acknowledged it at the time when you pointed it out. If someone looks at the talk page of that article, he can easily see how there were multiple claims that an editor was trying to object to/remove/etc. from the page simultaneously. That was a simple mistake that I agreed was a mistake when you pointed it out. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:43, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- Fair enough to make a mistake, but there was no attempt to rectify/explain the mistake or continue with dispute resolution processes. The claim was quite similar wording to the "content that has been here for years requires consensus" in your unblock request above. CMD (talk) 15:34, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- There was quite a bit of discussion to resolve the dispute on that talk page. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:54, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- There is more to the dispute resolution process than that, which is especially apparent when there is a refusal to discuss or make use of the dispute resolution processes after requesting a page lock immediately following a specifically misleading edit summary. I am having trouble expressing my thoughts on this well, but it's odd to read the above short reply which focuses on just one part of dispute resolution in a talkpage section which begun with an unblock request which similarly asserts discussion and focuses on one specific aspect of edit warring. On broader reflection, while I don't recall specifics, I had a vague positive impression of your contributions possibly based on some interactions in the deep past. I was not really editing around the time you were blocked, and was surprised by it when I later found out about it. The ping you replied to in the diff above reflected genuine confusion regarding the edit summary and related actions. The replies following, and I suppose those here now too, were disappointingly enlightening, and I cannot say I was surprised by the more recent blocks in the same was I initially was. I do want to have that positive feeling back; perhaps it is the current lack of this that prevented me from seeing the unblock request above as having the same spirit as Boing! seems to see in it. Perhaps I am also not a helpful interlocutor for this, but I am hopeful it might provide something helpful, slightly different to the incredulity focused on below. Best, CMD (talk) 17:56, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- I'm confused by what you're trying to accomplish. You came here, unsolicited, to bring up some problem on another page. My interpretation of your motive was "Hey, this guy pulls sneaky tricks". I responded by saying, "It was not a trick, it was a misunderstanding, which I acknowledged and if others look at that talk page, there is extensive conversation and you can see how it could have been confusing". Your complaint seems to now be that I requested page protection: of course I did, in order to stop the unhelpful edit warring. I don't see how that's a bad thing: this is an example of a time where I sunk a lot of energy into trying to resolve a conflict. What am I missing here about your posts and intentions and how it relates to me being a constructive editor? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:13, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- The point raised was not requesting page protection on its own as an isolated incident. The point raised was requesting page protection immediately after edit warring in a disputed change you preferred (this was exacerbated by having that request point to the edit history where you had just left an edit summary which mistakenly stated something incorrect, but that is also not by itself the full issue). It is perplexing to read "in order to stop the unhelpful edit warring" italicized, when the most recent edit prior to that request was yours. Is it not apparent that there is an incongruity in that, and why this might be seen as "a bad thing"? As to the solicitation, this page has been on my watchlist for I don't know how long, back to the deep past period mentioned above presumably, and I noticed the discussion. As to how it relates to constructive editing, it is a reflection following a block on issues that seem related to the reasons for that block. The confusion as to what I am trying to accomplish is understandable, I have ambivalent feelings which I tried to express above, so I don't think I'm fishing for a particular long-term end goal. That said, a block unblock block cycle is certainly not a great long-term end goal, and the unblock request did not read to me as likely to escape that cycle. The hope is, as mentioned, something helpful, but I don't think there is a particular accomplishment in mind. CMD (talk) 18:55, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- I assume that anyone who is going to protect a page is going to investigate why it is being protected, what the issue is, etc. I was not just trying to slide in and get my way and then have an ignorant admin protect it so that what I want was static. Or whatever else you're trying to say: I'm honestly not trying to put words in your mouth, I'm just explaining that I wasn't doing anything nefarious or underhanded and tried to actually resolve a dispute with talking page posts, an RfC, etc. So I appreciate your ambivalence and also how complicated and annoying that whole talk page scenario was, but if your concern is that I'm someone here to game the system or that I'm interested in using trickery to get what I want, I'm trying to explain how that's not the case. If you think there is some constructive way for me to break this cycle, I'm all ears. If you think it's intractable and it's just impossible for me to be a constructive editor, then I appreciate your perspective, but disagree and think that to the extent that anything I've done has been detrimental, it is far outweighed by the positives. And for that matter, I'm not interested in trying to bicker or relitigate, merely set the record straight about my intentions. Editors here have certainly pointed out how they think I'm a bad person or whatever and that can stand, so if your perspective is that I'm a net negative, then you are certainly entitled to that. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:06, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- The point raised was not requesting page protection on its own as an isolated incident. The point raised was requesting page protection immediately after edit warring in a disputed change you preferred (this was exacerbated by having that request point to the edit history where you had just left an edit summary which mistakenly stated something incorrect, but that is also not by itself the full issue). It is perplexing to read "in order to stop the unhelpful edit warring" italicized, when the most recent edit prior to that request was yours. Is it not apparent that there is an incongruity in that, and why this might be seen as "a bad thing"? As to the solicitation, this page has been on my watchlist for I don't know how long, back to the deep past period mentioned above presumably, and I noticed the discussion. As to how it relates to constructive editing, it is a reflection following a block on issues that seem related to the reasons for that block. The confusion as to what I am trying to accomplish is understandable, I have ambivalent feelings which I tried to express above, so I don't think I'm fishing for a particular long-term end goal. That said, a block unblock block cycle is certainly not a great long-term end goal, and the unblock request did not read to me as likely to escape that cycle. The hope is, as mentioned, something helpful, but I don't think there is a particular accomplishment in mind. CMD (talk) 18:55, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- I'm confused by what you're trying to accomplish. You came here, unsolicited, to bring up some problem on another page. My interpretation of your motive was "Hey, this guy pulls sneaky tricks". I responded by saying, "It was not a trick, it was a misunderstanding, which I acknowledged and if others look at that talk page, there is extensive conversation and you can see how it could have been confusing". Your complaint seems to now be that I requested page protection: of course I did, in order to stop the unhelpful edit warring. I don't see how that's a bad thing: this is an example of a time where I sunk a lot of energy into trying to resolve a conflict. What am I missing here about your posts and intentions and how it relates to me being a constructive editor? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:13, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- There is more to the dispute resolution process than that, which is especially apparent when there is a refusal to discuss or make use of the dispute resolution processes after requesting a page lock immediately following a specifically misleading edit summary. I am having trouble expressing my thoughts on this well, but it's odd to read the above short reply which focuses on just one part of dispute resolution in a talkpage section which begun with an unblock request which similarly asserts discussion and focuses on one specific aspect of edit warring. On broader reflection, while I don't recall specifics, I had a vague positive impression of your contributions possibly based on some interactions in the deep past. I was not really editing around the time you were blocked, and was surprised by it when I later found out about it. The ping you replied to in the diff above reflected genuine confusion regarding the edit summary and related actions. The replies following, and I suppose those here now too, were disappointingly enlightening, and I cannot say I was surprised by the more recent blocks in the same was I initially was. I do want to have that positive feeling back; perhaps it is the current lack of this that prevented me from seeing the unblock request above as having the same spirit as Boing! seems to see in it. Perhaps I am also not a helpful interlocutor for this, but I am hopeful it might provide something helpful, slightly different to the incredulity focused on below. Best, CMD (talk) 17:56, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- There was quite a bit of discussion to resolve the dispute on that talk page. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:54, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- Fair enough to make a mistake, but there was no attempt to rectify/explain the mistake or continue with dispute resolution processes. The claim was quite similar wording to the "content that has been here for years requires consensus" in your unblock request above. CMD (talk) 15:34, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- Excuse me: I was mistaken about that and acknowledged it at the time when you pointed it out. If someone looks at the talk page of that article, he can easily see how there were multiple claims that an editor was trying to object to/remove/etc. from the page simultaneously. That was a simple mistake that I agreed was a mistake when you pointed it out. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:43, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- Losing judgment seems to underplay the issues. Koavf was unblocked based on a stated promise not to edit war and to use dispute resolution processes. In addition to the two blocks since then (one from two simultaneous AN3 reports), they have also made things up in an edit summary and used protection gaming to lock in their edits and avoid dispute resolution processes. These appear to be active choices made in spite of what was said in the last (non-procedural) successful unblock request. There is nothing in the above unblock request that suggests it will be treated differently. CMD (talk) 03:37, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- I second what Boing! said. The blocking administrator should make an impartial analysis of the benefits Koavf brings to Wikipedia vs the negatives. Considering the huge amount of positive contributions and also that no editor gets a free pass from policies, I think if Koavf keeps having block-worthy issues, I suggest simply give him blocks for each occasion and let him back after a period of time, depending on the severity of the transgression and the context. After all, blocks are not punitive but to protect the project. And I think Koavf is bringing Wikipedia more positive than negatives, meaning in a balance he is not harming the project. Also, Koavf likely doesn't enjoy at all being blocked, so I suspect he is gonna try not to get in such situation. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 06:50, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- Justin, what would your reaction be to making the no-reverts rule you've suggested indefinite, subject to appeal here on your talk with any admin able to lift as an individual admin action (rather than requiring a community appeal) after a year? Valereee (talk) 18:56, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- I would have no objection to that and would not appeal it for the duration of 2024 at least. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:09, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Bbb23, do you have an opinion on that? It's an editing restriction pretty useful in solving the current issue, and I kind of feel like it kicks the question of net positive down the road without causing much actual wasting of other editors' time. Valereee (talk) 21:46, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Unblocked
After reviewing the discussion here, I am accepting your unblock request with the following restriction, which I'll log at WP:ER in a minute:
Koavf is subject to a one revert rule restriction. They may not make more than one revert on any page per 24 hours, subject to the usual exemptions such as blatant vandalism documented here. Failure to abide by this restriction will be enforced with blocks.
Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:48, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- For talk page watchers, this unblock is being discussed at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Koavf unblocked. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:01, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
Looks like this is your 20th block
I don't recall anyone with a worse block record. Mostly for edit-warring, a couple for violating a 1RR parole, 5 of them indefinite (the last unblock for an indefinite just over a year ago), some agf unblocked. Doug Weller talk 09:28, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Doug Weller: Why did you post this other than to harass me? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:00, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Justin, try to make things better, not worse. Drmies (talk) 03:09, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Oops, closer to 28 or 29
Granted you managed to edit for 9 years without a block, then went back to your old ways, mainly being blocked for editwarring/3RR violations and several for violating a 1RR ruling by the Arbitration Committee. You made promises to stop but you couldn't keep them. I don't see how making clear your block record is harassment, it's simply here to give anyone looking at any unblock request some of the background easily. I can of course understand how you wouldn't want me to do that. Doug Weller talk 13:31, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Doug Weller: I find it hard to believe that you think this is a constructive and helpful post to make. As I have asked you multiple times before, please stop posting noise like this. What I don't want you to do is post your negative, rude, harassment. Would you please stop? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:14, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- I can't tell if your silence is agreement or just ignoring my question. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:37, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- The only possible criticism I would levy on Doug Weller is WP:AVOIDYOU ie: say "It may be of interest to administrators to look at the block log" rather than "You have been blocked over 20 times". However, that's such a minor nitpick that it sounds unnecessarily harsh to even mention it. Seriously, Justin, you're pretty much at the Last Chance Saloon here, and if you don't abide by the 1RR restriction, you're likely to find yourself permanently banned from the project. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:04, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
A few words?
Hi Justin, I hope you don't mind a few words from me - I wasn't going to comment, because you must be feeling a bit down right now. But in recognition of your immense contribution to Wikipedia, I can't just let my thoughts pass by. And even if what I say sounds harsh, I'm honestly only trying to help.
I saw you were blocked for edit warring again. And then I saw your "I did not break 3RR" appeal - and, frankly, I shook my head in disbelief. Can I tell you what I would have been thinking had I been an admin reviewing your appeal? It would be "How can this guy possibly still not understand the difference between WP:EW and WP:3RR, with that kind of record of blocks for both?!" And I think that's what Doug Weller was trying to express - a feeling of incredulity, not any kind of attack on you. I'm sure a lot of other people seeing what's just happened will feel the same way.
So, what can you do about it now? I think you need to treat the Undo and Revert buttons as trapdoors to Satan's own septic tank. And *don't touch them*. I think you need to make a convincing case that a proper understanding of EW and 3RR has finally made its way into your head (and that really shouldn't be hard for someone with a BA in Philosophy - didn't you cover reasoning and logic?). If you can do that, and make it clear that you will treat reverts as if they're almost 100% forbidden to you, you might be in with a chance. If you can't, this really might be the end of the road.
So, sorry again if this sounds harsh. But someone needs to tell it straight to try to get it through to you. I wish you the best of luck. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:18, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- It doesn't sound harsh. I appreciate the help. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:14, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
Suggestion
Hello Koavf. Given that you are currently blocked, you may want to consider taking the course Negotiation, Mediation and Conflict Resolution Specialization. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 06:33, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- Sure, thanks. It's a good skill to have. Have a good 2024. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:34, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- Happy 2024! Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 06:52, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Notice
I've removed this account's granted user-rights per extensive block log for edit-warring. You may appeal the removal (or ask for restoration of individual user-rights) with a consensus at WP:AN, per current convention. - jc37 20:20, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- Understandable. Thanks for the notice. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:34, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
Category:United Nations diplomats has been nominated for merging
Category:United Nations diplomats has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 03:11, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Note that you are now subject to a community sanction
Following a discussion at the administrators' noticeboard, the following editing restriction now applies to you:
Koavf is subject to an indefinite zero-revert restriction. If an administrator blocks Koavf for violating this restriction, he may not be unblocked without a consensus at the administrators' noticeboard. This restriction may appealed after one year, and every six months after an unsuccessful appeal.
The sanction has been logged at Wikipedia:Editing restrictions. Another, similar proposal was closed as unsuccessful, and the siteban proposal remains open for discussion. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 06:18, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
- Noted. Thank you. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:26, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Theleekycauldron: I guess I'm confused on leaving open the discussion: weren't these rival proposals? Maybe I just don't understand the process here: is this common (i.e. having three options and closing two at one time)? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:31, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
- I considered that myself, but I don't think it would be a definitive reading that choosing more than one proposal should be impossible. If the community feels that a second sanction would be overkill, they can oppose it. But if the community still wishes to enact a siteban, I don't think it'd be fair to deny it the chance to be enacted because a more lenient remedy was also chosen. You are free to challenge that interpretation, of course, at WP:AN or WP:XRV. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 06:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
- I don't know that I need to escalate your interpretation and it may all be moot. Thanks for explaining. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:51, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 06:55, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
- I don't know that I need to escalate your interpretation and it may all be moot. Thanks for explaining. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:51, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
- I considered that myself, but I don't think it would be a definitive reading that choosing more than one proposal should be impossible. If the community feels that a second sanction would be overkill, they can oppose it. But if the community still wishes to enact a siteban, I don't think it'd be fair to deny it the chance to be enacted because a more lenient remedy was also chosen. You are free to challenge that interpretation, of course, at WP:AN or WP:XRV. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 06:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
- Please take care as your rollback access has been removed locally, you may not make use of your global rollback tools on the English Wikipedia per the global rights policy. You may want to install some custom userscripts to remove rollback and undo links to avoid inadvertently violating your 0RR above. — xaosflux Talk 11:24, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
- Duly noted. Thanks for the advice. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:35, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
| This is an archive of past discussions about User:Koavf. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |