Hello WJ94, please review WP:LEGITSOCK and consider making a user page declaring that you are using this account now. In general, you should stop using your other account. — xaosflux ^Talk 16:14, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sock_puppetry#Alternative_account_notification has details. — xaosflux ^Talk 16:16, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, Xaosflux - done that here and here. WJ94 (talk) 16:31, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WJ94. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 19:38, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that! WJ94 (talk) 20:00, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

When looking at a suspected "copyright violation" that's over a decade old, please consider

1) Checking the talk page history. and 2) Making sure the website you think we copied from is older than the edit you're suspicious of.

ApLundell (talk) 02:05, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know - I've replied to your post here. WJ94 (talk) 13:25, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for being a little snippy here. I realize now that part of the problem is that the talk page archive got mangled so that searching talk wouldn't have produced any results. ApLundell (talk) 18:25, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's ok - don't worry about it. I'm glad we got the the bottom of it, and hopefully the tag on the talk page should alert anyone in the future. WJ94 (talk) 14:03, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Elizium23. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Independent Network Charismatic Christianity, 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 the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 17:28, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Elizium23, thanks for the note - although I would appreciate receiving personal messages rather than impersonal and unspecific templates. I added Independent Network Charismatic Christianity to List of new religious movements because I thought it met the criteria for the list and the sourcing was appropriate. As you mentioned on the article's talk page, none of the sources specifically cite it as a "new religious movement" which is not something I had thought about, so I am happy with with you removing it. WJ94 (talk) 19:42, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In effect, there is a orthograph mistake un the title oficial the first article.

Regards,

--Yolanda95 (talk) 20:53, 8 December 2019 (UTC)Yolanda95[reply]

Hi Yolanda - I didn't quite understand your message but I think you are saying that one of the articles had a mistake in its title. This is what I though too, which is why I made the redirect. I can see that you have not undone my change so I am assuming that you are happy with this. WJ94 (talk) 11:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

On 10 January 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Independent Network Charismatic Christianity, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that leaders within the Independent Network Charismatic Christianity movement do not aim to grow churches, but rather seek to influence the "seven mountains of culture"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Independent Network Charismatic Christianity. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Independent Network Charismatic Christianity), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

--valereee (talk) 00:01, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

revert my edits, they made more sense and read better, were accurate compared to what is on the identity social science page after you removed my edits. i tried to be clearer for you this time where the inadequacies are on that page, it seems you need to read some information on how to cite ideas. it need to be completely rewriten or the world will be full of misinformationMgdyason (talk) 15:34, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

i do not have all the time in the world to read all i need to to understand all the workings of wikipedia. i started editing because article's expression is often very very poor like the Identity (social science) page. for eg it begins by using the singular: "Identity 'is'" then lists some abstract concepts along with some concrete yet not essential things like looks eg fashion, when in fact it ought to use the plural are. but that is wrong too, i'm not a linguist yet. but i know that the way it is written is wrong. i needs complete re-wording. i'm unsure of what you have linked me to but i think it's somehow enabling me to revert some things? i would like that and will try to be more neutral next time. i am yet to read what i did to Merleau-Ponty. thanks for remaining calm, and if you have allowed me to revert your reverts, thank you, and if you are an administrator thanks for being a good one.Mgdyason (talk) 10:35, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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) 03:02, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)}  If you reply here, please ping me by using {{re|Ks0stm}} in your reply.  17:12, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 October 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article C. Jouco Bleeker, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that religious studies scholar C. Jouco Bleeker believed that religions are like acorns? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/C. Jouco Bleeker. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, C. Jouco Bleeker), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:03, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Accountability partner at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! DigitalIceAge (talk) 17:23, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 30 October 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Accountability partner, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that some evangelical Christians confess their sexual temptations to an accountability partner to maintain their sexual purity? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Accountability partner. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Accountability partner), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		In true WP:HEY tradition, you saved Accountability partner and created a substantially improved article. I was astonished when I saw the article in today's DYK as I had presumed it was a near-certain goner in its AfD. I am very glad I was proven wrong; excellent work! ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:50, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that - much appreciated! WJ94 (talk) 10:02, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 15 March 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article GracePointe Church, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 2015, GracePointe Church, Nashville, Tennessee, became one of the first evangelical megachurches to openly support full equality for LGBTQ people? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/GracePointe Church. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, GracePointe Church), 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 12:02, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Faraz Anwar. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. M.Ashraf333 (talk) 14:47, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 3 July 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article If Books Could Kill, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that If Books Could Kill, there would be a podcast about it? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/If Books Could Kill. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, If Books Could Kill), 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted my addition of Trump's nickname for Asa Hutchinson, with the explanation of "per 2021 RfC." I don't know what that means. Please explain why you deleted it. Trajan1 (talk) 21:00, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Trajan1, thanks for your message. If you go to the talk page archive, you will see that there was a a formal discussion (a request for comment) which reached the consensus that additions to the list of Trump's nicknames must a) be described as a nickname by at least one secondary, independent, reliable source, b) be described as being used by Trump by at least one secondary, independent, reliable source, c) have been used by Trump on at least two separate occasions, and d) have lasting coverage of the nickname. I removed your Asa Hutchinson addition because it was sourced to a single tweet which did not describe it as a nickname, thus failing criterion b (and potentially others, but since any additional entry needs to meet all four criteria I didn't check any further - although I suspect it fails c and d too). I will admit that we could probably do to have this information more visible either on the talk page or as a notice on the article itself; I will perhaps look into that at some point soon. Let me know if you have any further questions on this. WJ94 (talk) 21:24, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, since you declined the article, I want to know what does 'non-primary sources' mean. So I might understand. 95.244.140.86 (talk) 17:26, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 95.244.140.86, thanks for your message. A primary source is a source which is written or published by a person or organisation connected to the subject being discussed. So, in this case, two of your sources were published by YouTube and thus were primary sources. Our guidelines on notability, which are used to determine whether a subject is notable enough to have a Wikipedia article, require that there must be significant coverage of a subject in multiple, independent reliable secondary sources. I declined your draft because it did not meet these criteria: two of your references were primary sources (i.e., published by YouTube) and the other two were independent source but did not mention YouTube 101 at all. I hope that explains it - let me know if you have any further questions. WJ94 (talk) 08:57, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello WJ94:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 2400 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:25, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited If Books Could Kill, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Greene.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While examining an edit by Nguyen280405 from my watchlist, I looked at their talk page and saw your warnings for this edit and two other instances of the same change. On their talk page, you accused them of vandalism when they insisted that 'Oriental Land' announced the decision to close the park at the beginning of the pandemic.

I looked at the source: '"We plan to reopen on March 16, but we will make an announcement after keeping close contact with relevant institutions", Oriental Land said on its website, adding that it would inform ticket holders of refund policies.'

In other words, Nguyen280405 was right.

Their edits are not without problems, in the same way those of most new editors are not perfect. But they were editing the article according to a reliable source - as their edit summary said - and this is in no way WP:VANDALISM. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 09:02, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BlackcurrantTea, thank for bringing this to my attention - you are absolutely right. I had assumed that these edits were vandalism but on reflection that was a mistake. I have left a message on the user's talk page to apologise. WJ94 (talk) 10:54, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for doing that. I was a bit surprised to see the company name (really, 'oriental'?), which led me to check the source. Tokyo DisneySea uses the same reference. Might you consider striking your warnings, to make it obvious to those who only take a quick glance at the user's talk page? Cheers, BlackcurrantTea (talk) 12:17, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's exactly what led me to my mistake. And thanks for that suggestion, I will do. WJ94 (talk) 14:03, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kantian ethics has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 15:59, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]