The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		Thank you for defending me at WP:ANI against User:WordSeventeen. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:42, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Z147

This talk page belongs to a LOW IQ USER — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1014:B02B:FE35:0:48:CD74:FF01 (talk) 10:31, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Understand your concerns but I do not believe that GiantSnowman is behaving in a fair, balanced and just way - his targeting of the Bantams Banter page is for personal reasons and I am just defending my corner, I trust you have given him the same friendly 'word in the ear'? (RedJulianG40 (talk) 12:43, 2 June 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article James Harrington (Yorkist knight) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Calvin999 -- Calvin999 (talk) 08:02, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article James Harrington (Yorkist knight) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:James Harrington (Yorkist knight) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Calvin999 -- Calvin999 (talk) 09:02, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please can you clarify why the assertions I made on the US.org.uk wiki page are not allowed to stand with this source: http://www.presstv.com/detail/2014/10/12/381997/israel-lobby-to-block-uk-palestine-vote/

which clearly points out that

       "The Zionist pressure group "United Synagogue" has called on all its members to press their constituency representatives to reject the motion or make amendments to it 

and that

     "Meanwhile, Davis Lewin, the Deputy Director and Head of Policy and Research at the Henry Jackson Society (HJS), has hit out at planners of the recognition proposal, describing them as people who openly want to destroy Israel."

Why is this not a quote that is allowed to stand? Internetwikier (talk) 15:26, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bizarre wikipedians, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. 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. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 11:38, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is very difficult to stop Vandalism on this artile. Is there any way to protect the page form IP user edits for a week? - varma (talk) 15:48, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Varmapak:, Yes I've requested temporary page protection here- so can you if you install WP:TWINKLE in your preferences! Cheers, _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 16:31, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for your concern. There is no edit war. I have dropped my objection to User:23 editor's edits and they can be safely restored. Upon reflection, I see 23 editor's point. Yours, Quis separabit? 19:15, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. 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; 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.--FDrago77 (talk) 12:33, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck with that- since you have been reported for vandalism. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 12:34, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thatip edit u reinstated was a blocked user. I am removing it again per WP:Evade. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 16:20, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Users are allowed to completely blank pages that they created. They are not allowed to remove speedy deletion tags, except to blank the page, as was the case here. I removed your warning from the user's talkpage, since their edit was valid. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:47, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very surprised how you wish to make sense of "A family of 4 hunting mushrooms"... But I am willing to be amazed! Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:45, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Zwerg Nase:, I've done a little bit. How true it is I have no idea! It does start off sounding a little Hans Christian Anderson doesn't it... _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 09:49, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It does make more sense that way. The article is on my to-do list. Once I expand it, I will probably outsource the list into a seperate article and go through all incidents, rephrase them and find sources. But it'll need time... Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:52, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! Yes it will, but it'll be good work. Have you got Vague's Televisionaries, and Smith's two-volume thing? _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 09:57, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any English literature so far, just German. But I'll try to get my hands on the Smith volumes. Zwerg Nase (talk) 10:16, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find my copy atm, but I seem to remember that most of his bibliography was to (not unnaturally!) to German works anyway. good luck. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 10:19, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Where has he been reported? TeaLover1996 ^{Talk to me ☏} 16:04, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry User talk:TeaLover1996, I seem to be getting notifications only intermittently. It was here. Cheers. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 19:43, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Don't bother attempting to reason with the IP. The named account is one of multiple socks they have had blocked over the past few weeks - the IP has conveniently neglected to mention the other named accounts. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:00, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 20:39, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked for 48 hours for making personal attacks. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Chillum 18:53, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is the edit in question: [1].

This is not acceptable. If you can demonstrate that you understand our no personal attacks policy and are willing to follow it then I can unblock you early. Chillum 18:56, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Serial Number 54129 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Thank you, I appreciate the opportunity. I will not ask for the block to be reviewed as it was perfectly within policy- and indeed, it was probably the only option open to whichever admin had seen it first; I understand that. The language I used was- well, possibly worse than has ever been used against me. I think I knew that myself- the moment I hit 'save page': I considered striking it out- and the only reason I didn't is that I thought that would be a greater hypocrisy. My only excuse was a heat of the moment response to being told to F-off, etc. What I should have done, of course, was to report it myself, and leave well alone. Ironically I have no personal beef with the other editor- we crossed swords today on an administrative page, which drifted onto his own TP- and don't recall any previous interaction with him, negative or otherwise. I think, although I might occasionally be robust (obviously, I see, sometimes too robust!) in my attitude, I've never quite let myself go in a response like that before. I'm taking this as an encouragement to not do so again. Cheers. See you in 48 Hours. If I have learned anything from this- it's to re-read (or at least bear in mind) the policies. Thanks again, _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 1:52 pm, Today (UTC−7)

Decline reason:

Not actually an unblock request (but ping Chillum to make sure the message is delivered). —Darkwind (talk) 21:02, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

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.

Thanks for your advice- appreciated. On edit: forgot to actually @Chillum:. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 21:10, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Chillum:.- Mine and another editor's interaction seem to result in a world of whatever at AN/I for you... sorry bout that! _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 19:18, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would say your blame in that particular matter is negligible.

I appreciate the mature fashion you have responded and have every expectation that this was an isolated incident. At this point I don't think the block is preventative and am going to lift it. Happy editing. Chillum 19:22, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Chillum:Understood- many thanks! _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 07:59, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making grossly uncivil comments towards others as you did here. Further instances will result in a block. Mike V • Talk 18:55, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Once the AfD has been raised and commented on, I think it would confuse the system to delete it, so instead I have closed it as speedy keep, recording that you withdrew the nomination. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:42, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note individuals who have nothing to say: so they copy other's edit summaries.

What are you on about? TeaLover1996 ^{Talk to me ☏} 10:35, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If I want to remove messages and comments from my talk page then I can. TeaLover1996 ^{Talk to me ☏} 10:55, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you can... but then you must expect editors to wonder what you have got to hide. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 10:57, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I really couldn't care less what other people think. They have their opinions and they're entitled to them, but that doesn't mean I have to agree or care about what they think. TeaLover1996 ^{Talk to me ☏} 10:59, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For a start, I would remind you that not caring what people think in a community such as this demonstrates a phenomenally bad attitude. Secondly, you should care, because if you continue to try and deliberately give editors the impression that you have status you do not have, then that behaviour will almost certainly be sanctioned. And another block so soon after your last would doubtless be more severe. Worth your consideration I would think. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 11:31, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, my guess is that this was a some sort of WP:POINT attempt to provoke a reaction from Serbian editors. While I don't have an opinion on these edits one way or the other, it would be quite legitimate to revert them all per WP:BE. GregorB (talk) 11:18, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@GregorB:, Cheers- I was thinking it was probably just being tendentious, but I don't have that specialist knowledge to be certain that it wasn't true or well-sourced. Either way, I'm keeping my eyes open. All the best, _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 11:28, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I know that I have my article Yassine El Hamida is nominated for deletion, but how is it innappropiate?. Before you delete it, tell me on my talk page. Jamie Welford (talk) 16:19, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Because he doesn't exist? Anyhow, the choice is not mine to make. Cheers! _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 16:21, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On edit: He doesn't on WP, anyway. End of conversation. Ciao. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 16:34, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Jamie Welford, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: I think this version is acceptable in terms of WP:UPYES. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 09:35, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@JohnCD: No worries- too much self-identifiable info though? _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 09:36, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He's 19, so I don't think that's a problem; and he is trying to contribute to the encyclopedia, even if has some learning to do, so he isn't the sort of Facebooker U5 is really directed at, who is here only to make a user page. JohnCD (talk) 09:40, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, that was not supposed to be a sandbox edit or what have you, but a real report. My first one in all these years. Please see the history of Zeybeks and the TP.-- Zz (talk) 11:58, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a content dispute about their ethnicity? Perhaps you want WP:DRN or something, but that board was for reporting individual editors as edit warriors. I can see you've been at it with User:Mendess55, but be aware that the history makes you look to be on similar level- and possibly also that you both logged out to war as IPs! _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 12:11, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Naah, I use my own account. As for the IPs, I tried to report that, but at the time being, there was not sufficient activity. Maybe I waited too long, because I tried to get a conversation with Mendes55. WP:DRN sounds good, as I do not feel any desire to "punish" him, but it does not address the point here: there are pretty clear standards for references. I guess a third opinion by a "wikipedia official" should help: somebody just telling to please, please, stick to standards of citing sources and to make sure they are reputable. -- Zz (talk) 12:26, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure where you meant this edit to go. If it was in relation to the Anders Feder subpage case, would you please move it above the {{DRN archive bottom}} tag, since the case is already closed and it may mess up the archive bot if you don't. If that's not the case you were referring to, please move it to the case where you meant it to go. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 14:41, 16 June 2015 (UTC) PS: Non-admin closures aren't really a part of DRN, indeed, administrators aren't really an essential element to DRN and most of us who work there aren't admins (including me). Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 14:43, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Great stuff, many thanks! yeah it was an ec that I ignored there. cheers _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 14:45, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, not sure, you might just be being a bit paranoid - there are lots of football editors around, doesn't mean all of them are socks. Maybe re-raise at SPI if you have a particularly strong feeling. GiantSnowman 18:46, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not really- just the timing and the 'unhelpful' nature of the edits. Will keep an eye though, cheers. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 18:49, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the ext link for Sleepbox because it was dead. I do edits for a reason. 118.93.90.74 (talk) 19:55, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you keep on putting back a link tha is in the refs? That is not how it works. 118.93.90.74 (talk) 01:36, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Gamesonomy, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 19:56, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your name is very similar to a song.--Cosmic  Emperor  15:50, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@CosmicEmperor:, Indeedy, and with a pretty ancient provenance. My inspiration was possibly just a little less cultured Cheers! _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 18:10, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Like this also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:39.47.50.14#Note --Cosmic  Emperor  09:29, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks! You are certainly no less deserving! 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 19:10, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just because a user isn't on my list of users I trust doesn't mean I don't trust them, the list is users I will ask questions the most commonly. That is all. TeaLover1996 ^{Talk to me ☏} 21:42, 18 June 2015 (UTC)</> [reply]