Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 7 sections are present.

Hey. Welcome to my talk page. It's a place where you can leave me messages. Please do not leave templates unless it is absolutely necessary. See also the essay WP:TEMPLAR. I am a lady, so please do use female pronouns, but I won't fault you for not doing so accidentally. (I can be a bit masculine sometimes!) But anywho, don't hesitate to give me some critiques, invoke some discussion, or anything like it! Thanks.

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shabbos App 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/Shabbos App (2nd nomination) 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.

I work for Joseph Walker and was told to make some additions and amend a few items. The first he informed me of was that date change. My source is Mr Walker himself but I will make citation of my sources when I make the changes. If he informs me that the date was in fact correct I will change it back.

Please note the instruction for your statement in the Gamergate request for a case:

Without exception, statements (including responses to other statements) must be shorter than 500 words.

Your statement is at 654 words, so is over the limit. I realize it isn't far over, but several statements are over, and I am contacting anyone who is over 500. Please recall that this statement is not intended to be a full exposition of all evidence, which occurs at the next step, but simply a statement requesting a case. Please trim back your statement. For the arbitration committee --S Philbrick(Talk) 20:02, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, thanks. I will be chopping it up and the like to reach under 500 words. I've been stressed and busy for the past couple of days, so sorry for that. Tutelary (talk) 23:09, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Cambodian genocide denial. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:09, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:House of Assembly of Jamaica. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:12, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tutelary. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)

If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).[reply]

       Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:In the news. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tutelary. I noticed this change you made to Draft:Gamergate controversy with the edit summary Undid revision 634569431 by Aquillion (talk) This was discussed a while back in the archives, this was the result of said compromise. I endorse it and I dissent against your revert of such.

Would you be so kind as to link to the discussion you were referring to as I could not find it in the archives. CIreland (talk) 22:00, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A precursory look before I have to leave reveals this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Gamergate_controversy/Archive_12#GG_Branding But I remember there being a bigger more heated discussion about it. I'll look more thoroughly when I get back home. Tutelary (talk) 22:18, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:15, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:General_sanctions/Gamergate/Requests_for_enforcement. about tarc edit war Thanks. Retartist (talk) 03:44, 21 November 2014 (UTC)Template:Z48[reply]

Hi, I'll admit I'm new to editing wikipedia, but you messaged me saying that I should leave an edit summary. I belive I did leave a summary for my edit of the article on 8chan, due to a large amount of content being biased and potentially defamatory.

I'm sorry if I came out harsh wasn't my intention, didn't know you added that, right now the article probably needs a descpriptive section, and maybe a background section but there isn't a lot to add. And the criticism should go last as it's common, with a neutral title like "Media response" as in the 4chan article

Also I was wondering if the The David Pakman Show show is RS, I had heard it was https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWDF9WFtro4 Loganmac (talk) 23:12, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I still believe it's acceptable to mention it in the lead. It's what the sources say its notable for. Also check out my mention on your talk page. It should seriously be moved back to 8chan. Tutelary (talk) 23:13, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your sources are biased and your article has a big fat citation needed next to the claim that the userbase harasses women. Please fix this.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at ∞chan. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.   Mike V • Talk 23:23, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike V:, I was not aware that with the vandalism reverts, I was over. I acknowledge and see my reverts now and if I was given an edit warring warning, I would've self reverted my most recent change. I was inappropriate for going over 3RR on said article and if unblocked, will be given a 0RR on the article for the next 48 hours. (Followed to the WP:BANEX exceptions, blatant vandalism. I will be limited solely to the talk page. Tutelary (talk) 23:26, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The concerning edits were: 1, 2, 3, 4, and though not the same material, a revert nonetheless (5). I would encourage you to request an unblock through the template provided above. Mike V • Talk 23:42, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As you requested on IRC, I've unblocked you per your agreement to abide by 0RR on ∞chan for the next 2 days. Jackmcbarn (talk) 04:45, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Confiscated Armenian properties in Turkey. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]