User talk:Optakeover

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Nomination of Adidas Telstar 18 for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Adidas Telstar 18 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adidas Telstar 18 until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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.

Maria di Rohan Deletions[edit]

Hi Optakeover! This is I see that you deleted all of my work today for 28 March 2018. I don't understand how it is "abusive" or "vandalism". FINE appears in the original libretto by Cammarano in 1843. The word 'FINE', pronounced 'fee-nay' in Italian, means 'the end', which always appears at the end of Italian opera librettos---the thing I was writing about. I'm really perplexed. All of my additions today were hard-researched scholarly thoughts on the opera. Please get back to me and explain how they are abusing anything. Please! Have a good evening, Op! Thanks again!


Hello, I'd like to apoligize for reverting you reverting my change on a few weeks ago without saying a word. This probably comes over more rude than intended. I'm just very new to editing and don't know my way around the controls yet. Regarding the actual change (, the source is the same as for the preceding sentence, i.e. I think my change could be improved in wording though, since English is neither my mother's tongue, nor am I a good writer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Woodsdutch (talkcontribs) 18:26, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

@Woodsdutch: Hey, thank you for telling me! Sorry that I mistook your edit as a bad edit. Any time you think you want to add it back to the article, you can just go ahead and edit the article. Cheers! Optakeover(U)(T)(C) 19:27, 28 May 2018 (UTC)


I took a look at the user's contributions, using this edit as an example. It's unsourced, it's grammatically incorrect, and its actual improvement to the sum of human knowledge is minimal. However, it is on-topic for the article in question and sounds relevant. You cannot categorically and unambiguously prove that the user wrote it with the specific intent to damage the encyclopedia. So you can't use AIV for it and need to go to a different noticeboard. I suggest WP:ANI. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:43, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: I see. Thank you for the clarification. Nevertheless, with regards to your reply on AIV, what I am saying is that "Failure to cite a reliable source" is an accepted basis for warning for persistent disruptive editing, and subsequent reporting on AIV, which leads on to a block. It is implied that persistent failure to cite a reliable source has to meet some form of policy, otherwise this would never work in AIV and this type of warning should not be given at all. Optakeover(U)(T)(C) 15:56, 7 July 2018 (UTC)