Jump to content

User talk:The Banner: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Acc013 (talk | contribs)
Line 129: Line 129:
::::Those are reliable sources, and I'm only getting personal because I've had to repeat the same thing to you multiple times. Those sources are reliably independent. Stop switching up the story. Before you even said they were 'owned' by the 'micronation'. I looked into POV-Pushing and thats clearly what you're trying to do. You seem to not agree with that micronations views. I don't entirely agree with all of their views either but I still remain neutral.
::::Those are reliable sources, and I'm only getting personal because I've had to repeat the same thing to you multiple times. Those sources are reliably independent. Stop switching up the story. Before you even said they were 'owned' by the 'micronation'. I looked into POV-Pushing and thats clearly what you're trying to do. You seem to not agree with that micronations views. I don't entirely agree with all of their views either but I still remain neutral.
:::::Related sources like their own websites are not reliable sources to determine notability. I really must suggest that you read those pages mentioned before. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">[[User:The Banner|<span style="color:green">The&nbsp;Banner</span>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:The Banner|<i style="color:maroon">talk</i>]]</span> 11:00, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
:::::Related sources like their own websites are not reliable sources to determine notability. I really must suggest that you read those pages mentioned before. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">[[User:The Banner|<span style="color:green">The&nbsp;Banner</span>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:The Banner|<i style="color:maroon">talk</i>]]</span> 11:00, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
::::::They have been read. They don't display anything stating that its 'self-sourced'. its all independently written on independent sites. I don't know what you're going on about.[[User:Acc013|Acc013]] ([[User talk:Acc013|talk]]) 11:02, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:02, 15 April 2021

I try to the best of my knowledge and belief to contribute to the small red block of the image
Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back.




Checklist

Back again

User:109.77.93.171. Mutt Lunker (talk) 01:56, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Who, what, where? The Banner talk 10:35, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, the late User:Patrick Mcdermott25. They also popped up later as User:109.76.188.252. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:51, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, sugar... The Banner talk 11:12, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a few of his target articles to my watchlist. Is it useful to block the IPs? The Banner talk 11:53, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure. They seem to have the ability to pop up on a new IP at will but that's not something I'm knowledgeable about, or as to whether this is an active strategy or something that they are unaware of and only benefitting by accident. I've seen this IP-hopping with the most apparently incompetent socks. I suppose it might establish a record of their activity and an IP range if range-blocking is desirable but, again, not something I am knowledgeable about. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:24, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Now at User:109.76.175.36. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:29, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe another sockpuppet investigation? Perhaps they can then give a range block. The Banner talk 10:58, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it would be good if they did. Mutt Lunker (talk) 13:14, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Now at User:64.43.14.151. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:12, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you reverting my edits

I've noticed that you're undoing my changes on the Vuze wikipedia page, hm.

SPAM. The Banner talk 17:30, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Adminship term length on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:36, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tyne and Wear Metro RDT

Hello, I noticed your recent edit to Template:TWM Yellow line RDT broke some links. I wasn't sure why you made the edit so thought I should leave you a message, rather than reverting. Best wishes NemesisAT (talk) 20:52, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment I changed them, they were all links to disambiguation pages. If you revert, please check the links to be correct. The Banner talk 21:36, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah okay, I'm not sure what happened but the links all appear to be working in the older revision now, so I've reverted your edit. Thanks NemesisAT (talk) 22:41, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My guess is that someone else noticed the links to the disambiguation pages and repaired the underlying templates/modules without noticing that I had already solved the problem in an alternative way, thus creating new problems. The Banner talk 23:51, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 42

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 42, January – February 2021

  • New partnerships: PNAS, De Gruyter, Nomos
  • 1Lib1Ref
  • Library Card

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:28, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MEDRS

Hi. I came across now archived Village pump#MEDRS talk and wanted to let you know that I too faced instanced of misapplication of WP:MEDRS guideline but I haven't a chance to comment on. I suggest you to take a look at this ANI#Canvassing_in_Malassezia request and visit the Wikipedia_talk:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medicine)#Primary_sources_usage. I suggest you to put the latter on your watch list and leave no comment. Thanks!

Beaulieu

Dear The Banner. I don't understand your reason to change the profession my father held at restaurant Beaulieu. From 1963 to 1970 he was RESTAURATEUR of restaurant Beaulieu at Castle Doorwerth. Chef at the time was Albert Emke who became restaurateur after my father left in 1970.

You claim sources my father was Chef. Please show that source. The Michelin links only mention the restaurant name.

But more important... I am his son. I should know.

So please leave his profession at RESTAURATEUR. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brenn (talkcontribs) 19:30, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:RS and WP:OR. The knowledge of a son is unfortunately not an acceptable source for Wikipedia. I should be published somewhere, by a third party. Sorry.The Banner talk 20:32, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All good, but where does it say he was the Chef? That source is nowhere to be found.Brenn (talk) 12:58, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, I found confirmation that Albert Enke was the chef and that your father was the leaseholder. But if you disagree with that, I am willing to remove the whole Brenninkmeijer connection.The Banner talk 13:20, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 March 2021

Verdis

Hello, I understand you dislike the topic of that Verdis article but please leave it alone. It was approved for redirect and has obtained more sources than RTL, VentsMagazine, LikaKlub and more. That sockpuppet user hasn't been around for a while.

If Verdis has to go then Molossia and Sealand would have to go too. I suggest just leaving it alone. That's my point of view.

Acc013 (talk) 08:58, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I will start a sockpuppet investigation against you. The Banner talk 09:11, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For your information: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SwedenAviator. The Banner talk 10:00, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How much of a child are you? Why do you hate this subject so much? And I am not a sockpuppet but alright. I do live in Australia though Acc013 (talk) 11:24, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I do not hate the subject. But as a good Wikipedian, I clean Wikipedia from non-notable subjects. The Banner talk 11:33, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Understandable, but with all the other sources out there that micronation is on, how does it make it non-notable when the redirect was approved etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acc013 (talkcontribs) 01:38, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bucause most sources are trivial or related to the subject. The Banner talk 08:50, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

VSN Wiki

Your opinion on Wikipedia seems to me to be crystal clear. Diederickdan (talk) 13:12, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you Conflict of Interest and personal need to start spamming too. Please keep Wikipedia neutral. The Banner talk 13:16, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Terra nullius shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Acc013 (talk) 10:46, 15 April 2021 (UTC) [reply]

Ah, retaliating because you do not like it that your editwarringen and POV-pushing is called out. The Banner talk 10:49, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Grow up, you called a large independent source 'micronation owned' lol - and i dont understand what you mean by editwarringen and pov-pushing, but you must understand those sources are independent, and the article was peacefully left alone until you decided to remove such items. i just did the favours of adding it back for people, which you continued to undo. If you think it has such little importance, you may as well remove the 'Enclava' mention in that too which only has one site source. Acc013 (talk) 10:53, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, and because you lack the proper arguments you now start with personal attacks? But you better try reading WP:COI and Reliable sources. The Banner talk 10:56, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Those are reliable sources, and I'm only getting personal because I've had to repeat the same thing to you multiple times. Those sources are reliably independent. Stop switching up the story. Before you even said they were 'owned' by the 'micronation'. I looked into POV-Pushing and thats clearly what you're trying to do. You seem to not agree with that micronations views. I don't entirely agree with all of their views either but I still remain neutral.
Related sources like their own websites are not reliable sources to determine notability. I really must suggest that you read those pages mentioned before. The Banner talk 11:00, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
They have been read. They don't display anything stating that its 'self-sourced'. its all independently written on independent sites. I don't know what you're going on about.Acc013 (talk) 11:02, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]