User talk:yetisyny

Welcome!

Hello, Yetisyny, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Wisteria Event Campground, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Starting an article
• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Acroterion (talk) 13:26, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for creating that article

Thanks Acroterion, I apologize for not understanding your policies better. Sorry about creating that article. I will try to learn more about Wikipedia policies in the future, especially if I ever create another article. I think I'll just mostly stick to improving existing articles, since that's what I'm good at, and your policies for what articles to include or exclude are overly complex and not explained very well on the pages describing those policies. Obviously you understand Wikipedia policies better than I do so I think I'll steer clear of creating any articles for now. I think I might look at the articles nominated for deletion so I can learn more about what NOT to do... I suppose you were right to delete that article I wrote according to the policies, since after I challenged its deletion, someone else who knows a lot about the policies explained why the article shouldn't have been created and was against Wikipedia's policies, and upheld the decision to delete it. I thought it was notable and met the other criteria, but I guess I was wrong, since I don't have much experience with Wikipedia's policies and find them quite confusing. At least I understand the policies for editing articles such as Neutral Point of View and having sources for everything. Sorry about all that business with me creating an article; I thought it was a good article I wrote and that it qualified under Wikipedia's criteria, but I'm willing to admit that I made a mistake and don't understand all your rules, and hope you folks aren't mad at me. Have a nice day and keep up the good work. --Yetisyny (talk) 18:40, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

User Page thingy

Please use {{user page|logo=(yes or no)|noindex=yes}} on all the user pages and user subpages. I found this user page by using Google.

What it looks like without the logo:

What it looks like with the logo:

---

I'll help you with putting it on this page:

P.S. Please use :, then ::, then :::, etc, if you want to reply to this section.
Example:
Original text
:Reply 1
::Reply 2
:::Reply 3
Result:
Original text

Reply 1

Reply 2

Reply 3

---

Please also use ~~~~.

---

P.S. Should I go through ALL THE SUBPAGES of User:Yetisyny and User talk:Yetisyny and add {{user page|logo=(yes or no)|noindex=yes}}?
Why are there a lot of spammy "userboxen"? Also, it's not "userboxen", it's "userboxes".
To me, I think you're the worst user I know.
I'm also deleting all the "userboxen" from your user page, if you don't mind. Please add a subpage called User:Yetisyny/UBX. — dargereldren ^{T C G E R} 22:47, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I have fixed my user page and gotten rid of all the userboxes. Please do not make any further edits to my user page or create any pages in my userspace; if you have further concerns, please post them here on the talk page rather than making edits of my user page or stuff like that. Have a nice day. --Yetisyny (talk) 15:55, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Dike v. dyke

Hi Yetisyny, you were right to make the change at Columbia (supercontinent), to be consistent with the rest of the article. However, please note that there are many pages out there that use 'dyke' rather than 'dike' to describe minor vertical intrusions, because that is the spelling in British English, which is used in most of the world outside the US, such as in sheeted dyke complex. Take a look at WP:ENGVAR, which provides reasonable guidance on when to use which spelling. Mikenorton (talk) 18:40, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

btrfs

The underlines I put where present to point out the materials which needs to be verified, there not part of the writing style.

As btrfs User I never saw existence of this. I know wikipedia is not a user manual, but the releving materials should be at least checked by official source.2A02:8422:1191:6E00:56E6:FCFF:FEDB:2BBA (talk) 10:59, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia has templates to use to point out which information needs to be verified, plus you can also leave comments that are visible in the code of the article when you edit it, but aren't visible to people reading the page, and you can also point out issues on an article's talk page. I've never seen anyone underline the text in an article that they think needs to be fact-checked/verified. That is not a common practice here. Personally I think it looks confusing to someone reading an article who expects to see something that looks like an encyclopedia entry, and then certain text appears underlined for no apparent reason (the reason is not apparent to the person reading it). Anyway, my point is, instead of underlining, you should use templates that are for text that needs references, and put comments in the article that are only visible to people editing it, and post things on the talk pages of the articles to explain what you are doing to other people. Because your underlining thing, nobody else besides you knew what that meant, that it had to do with things that needed references. You have to communicate this kind of stuff to other people who edit the articles, but WITHOUT having the people who are just reading and NOT editing the articles catching on. It's kind of complicated to do that on a wiki, I'll admit. And your underlining idea was kind of creative, I'll give you that. But I think most people who saw the underlining were just baffled by it and had no idea what it meant. Anyway, I appreciate your dialogue with me on this and hope you take this into consideration. I doubt I will be editing that btrfs article again, but you seem interested in the subject, so please keep up the good work and consider other methods for communicating with other editors besides the underlining thing. Posting this here on my talk page, for instance, is a very useful way to communicate, you can try that with other people who edit that article too, works better than underlining. Anyway you should probably make a post to the talk page for the btrfs article and explain which bits need to be verified and all of that, so that other people who edit that page can help out with that and so we can all cooperate on this stuff. Thanks and keep up the good work. --Yetisyny (talk) 03:58, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

I know that templates exists, but I don't how to use them and it is difficult to find that you need in wiki formating pages of wikimedia.2A02:8422:1191:6E00:56E6:FCFF:FEDB:2BBA (talk) 08:24, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Here, try these templates which relate to citing sources: Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles. You should find a lot of useful ones there. If you have any further questions, please ask them here: Wikipedia:Help desk. I don't spend a lot of time on Wikipedia so if you ask me questions I might not respond in a timely manner, plus I'm not an expert on Wikipedia or anything. The people at Wikipedia:Help desk know more about this stuff than I do, so if you have any more questions please ask them instead of me, since they'll probably have better answers. Also, if you place {{Help me}} "then your question" on your talk page, a volunteer will assist you there! --Yetisyny (talk) 15:00, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Bradley Manning/October 2013 move request

Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I voted, based on the best knowledge available to me at this time about all the candidates. Your little reminder about this election was very helpful and I am thankful about being informed of matters such as this. Keep up the good work! --Yetisyny (talk) 09:08, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Yetisyny. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Yetisyny. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Negative energy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carl Anderson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Železník (village), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hungarian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of DeSmuME for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article DeSmuME 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/DeSmuME (2nd nomination) 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. Woodroar (talk) 02:18, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

AFD/Redirecting

Just an FYI in response to this comment of yours, in actuality, we're both correct.

On my side of things, it is perfectly acceptable for an editor to forgo WP:AFD and just be bold and just WP:REDIRECT an article - it's actually encouraged to cut down on bureaucracy and process if it's seems uncontroversial. I felt it would be uncontroversial, as it seems that through the discussions with DSemu, you had learned about Wikipedia's notability, and with that knowledge, would now agree that Kega doesn't meet the requirements either.

However, its only okay to be bold and redirect when there's no opposition - as soon as you objected, the next step was AFD, so that was the right thing to do. Additionally, you were right to point out that the redirect target did not actually mention Kega anymore, which is indeed a legitimate concern. I assumed it had because the redirect had been in place for so many years, that it would be mentioned at the redirect target, but it appears to have been removed at some point. If Kega isn't mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia, then yes, it would be better to delete. Sergecross73 msg me 14:25, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. I thought it would be best to do AfD because the redirect went to a page where it would not discuss the subject matter, WP:GNG which I now understand better than I did before is in question here, and the process used for the DeSmuME article seems to be working for that one. I am interested to hear that being bold and redirecting an article is sometimes correct, I did not know that. But, in this case, it is a useless redirect to a page with no relevant information on the topic, a page that only links to articles on emulators that have their own Wikipedia articles. So I felt that a redirect served no useful purpose and actually would be a bit confusing for users, since if they type in Kega Fusion expecting to see an article or at least part of an article about it, instead they get a page listing emulators where the only mention of it is a link that redirects back to the page they are already on. Anyway than you for your feedback, I am always trying to learn more from other users and you have been quite helpful! Yetisyny (talk) 14:33, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Yup, like I was saying, it's not so much that you acted wrong - what you said and did was correct - it was more clarifying that I wasn't in the wrong either. Sergecross73 msg me 14:49, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Apologies if I implied you did anything wrong. I always try to assume good faith but I think my wording in the edit summary there was a bit off. Although to clarify, I never thought or even implied that your INTENTIONS were wrong, I just thought that it was the incorrect PROCEDURE but still done in good faith, but it turns out, I was a bit too narrow-minded about procedure as well, since I knew AfD was a proper procedure, but did not know that what you were doing was also considered proper procedure too. I am still learning. Sorry if it sounded like I was lecturing you, when I probably know less about this stuff than you do, if any lecturing is to be done it should be you lecturing me, I am certainly not an authority on Wikipedia rules or procedure and I am open to any correction whenever I get things wrong. :) Yetisyny (talk) 14:55, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kega Fusion 3.64 emulating Zero Tolerance on Windows 10.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kega Fusion 3.64 emulating Zero Tolerance on Windows 10.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) 17:27, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kega Fusion logo.gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kega Fusion logo.gif. 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) 17:28, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Yetisyny. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

"ESPer" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect ESPer. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 31#ESPer until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. BDD (talk) 16:27, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:29, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Ren'Py games for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Ren'Py games 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/List of CryEngine games 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.

Respiciens (talk) 12:24, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:13, 29 November 2022 (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) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)