User talk:331dot/Archive 12

This is a subpage of 331dot's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Please place new comments at the bottom of the page. If you are responding to a post I left on your talk page, please do so there. If you are responding to an edit I made to an article, please comment on the article talk page. I welcome talk page stalkers offering any knowledge or assistance they have.

Concern regarding Draft:Blaux

Hello, 331dot. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Blaux, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 07:01, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Randy Bishop has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Randy Bishop. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 15:23, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MrMattHedrich

Thanks for stepping in on this. This is a tough one; I'm pretty sure he has good intentions, but some serious competency issues, given his recent edits to his talk page. Some of this edits to entertainment topics are relatively harmless [1], but outside of altering Disney synopses, we have edits like this [2] and [3] (good faith, but questionable detail inclusion and wording) and this [4] (huh?). Thoughts? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:55, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I wish to acknowledge your comment but I'll have to give a more thoughtful answer later. :) 331dot (talk) 15:15, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ohnoitsjamie Yes, I think that they want to help, but they are in over their head. One reason I advocated for unblock appeals to continue to be made on-wiki (as opposed to moving them all to UTRS) was that making the request itself is an indicator of committment to the project and knowledge of things like formatting- and in this case, they seem to have difficulty with that. Throwing their other edits on top of it, I'm not convinced that they should be editing right now. I think that the SO that I proposed to them in March is still the way to go- and I'm not sure I would accept it after 6 months- but that's a start. 331dot (talk) 20:30, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request you declined

Re: [5] - you may be interested to know that the user has already created another account, continued with their long-term pattern of nonsensical vandalism, and been blocked again....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:09, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delhi

I live in Delhi and know more about Delhi riots than you, so before you undo any change read about it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Burningfire22 (talk • contribs)

Burningfire22 Wikipedia does not summarize personal knowledge or personal opinions, but what independent reliable sources say. Most Indian media is too biased on this event to be used as sources in the article on the riot. We cannot assert people are guilty of crimes until and unless they are convicted in a court of law, not a court of public opinion. You are now blocked from the article due to edit warring; if you wish to collaborate with others on what the article should say, and or the sources are inaccurately summarized, please discuss on the talk page, but please review prior discussions first. 331dot (talk) 16:47, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please also review WP:BLP. 331dot (talk) 16:48, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou

Hi thanks for blocking it for the moment. How can i report it or get account access back. Where should i apply? I've mailed to stewards too as emergency suggested there. 103.10.31.47 (talk) 09:20, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:COMPROMISED for guidance in that area. If you already contacted a steward, that's pretty much all you can do. 331dot (talk) 09:24, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can you check the connection between my account User:Suryabeej after it got hacked any similar ip? Cause yesterday that account put afd and was well known about previous afd and removed that from my account after it got hacked. 103.10.31.47 (talk) 09:31, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have that ability; you would need to ask a checkuser. 331dot (talk) 09:33, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion

Instead of annoying experienced editors who are doing their best to combat vandalism, why not protect the article in question (Scottish Premiership) from idiotic editing? Bye. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 08:58, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jmorrison230582 If you are annoyed that I have asked you to abide by Wikipedia policy that you should be well aware of after your extensive experience here, and use basic human civility when performing your actions, that says more about you than me. If you wish to see an article protected, please request it at WP:RFPP. 331dot (talk) 09:00, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing me in the right direction. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 11:53, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disclosure

Hi 331dot I have made a disclosure as per your instructions on my user page. By doing so, do I have the right to make changes on the articles which I have listed?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ijeshe (talk • contribs)

Ijeshe I have moved your comment from the archive. You should not directly edit articles related to your conflict of interest in most cases(exceptions are written here), but you should make formal edit requests(click for instructions) on article talk pages. 331dot (talk) 11:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You should also declare your conflict of interest on those article talk pages. 331dot (talk) 11:53, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Official"

I've just checked some of this user's deleted edits and he's a minor. Deb (talk) 09:34, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So does that mean it's okay to unblock them? :) 331dot (talk) 09:36, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you think it's okay for him to use his own name. And if you believe it is his own name. Deb (talk) 12:08, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI

Hi. Just a courtesy note to say I've gone to ANI per your suggestion. Thanks. 92.24.246.11 (talk) 15:50, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't a suggestion, more of a telling you the options that you have. I don't recommend it, but that's your choice. 331dot (talk) 15:52, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, that's acknowledged. :) 92.24.246.11 (talk) 15:53, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Hi, I am not an active contributor on English Wikipedia, and I do not have a background about the process of moving categories, so can you help me and move this Category to "Kuwait Emir Cup", please? According to the main article. Thanks in advance.--فيصل (talk) 22:02, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I might suggest that you ask at Requested Moves so that you get someone 100% confident that they can carry out such a move. 331dot (talk) 08:11, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

en-WP and India

If you haven't seen this one before, it's pretty good: A vicious culture war is tearing through Wikipedia Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:04, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there

Was this message meant for me? I tried checking the latest entries and didn’t see my username pop up. Perhaps it’s my lousy WiFi just being slow. Celestina007 (talk) 14:18, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my! I see it now. Thanks for the notification. Celestina007 (talk) 15:53, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to your reply on the Help page

Thank you for such a prompt response to my question on the Help page. In looking at the Wikitia site, there seems to be no obvious or designated place to make a complaint and, as I pointed out earlier, the process for editing is tied to a payment system which, in the circumstances, seems to be quite wrong. As to my Wikipedia draft article, I have tried to ascertain whether a resubmission is reviewed by the same person or whether it has to await a new review : I'd be grateful if you were able to shed light on this? My thanks again. Hunaniaeth (talk) 20:31, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hunaniaeth There is nothing to prevent the same reviewer from conducting a review, though it could be someone else. Regarding Wikitia, you could ask the Wikimedia Foundation for advice, but anything more than that would probably require more time and money than it is worth. 331dot (talk) 20:43, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Zoli Toth

Thank you for your feedback. I included so many references because a previous rejection was based on not having enough. I could certainly have less references. I thought that every statement needs to be supported with a reference. I'll take your advice into consideration. Have a nice day! Bela Adu (talk) 15:33, 25 May 2021 (UTC)Bela Adu[reply]

Bela Adu All information does need to have a citation or reference- but before you add anything and everything you can find, you first need to establish that this person is notable, and the way to do that is with fewer references of higher quality, not lots of references of lesser quality. 331dot (talk) 15:41, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so I can support my statements by using one reference multiple times, rather than adding independent references with overlapping information. Got that! But how would you define a high quality reference? Does it necessarily have to be in English? I do appreciate your help. Bela Adu (talk) 16:06, 25 May 2021 (UTC)Bela Adu[reply]

References do not have to be in English. It helps, but it is not required, see WP:NOENG. The page Your First Article explains things better than I could. 331dot (talk) 16:09, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to answer me! Bela Adu (talk) 16:15, 25 May 2021 (UTC)Bela Adu[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	Thank you for putting up with my constant boring torture regarding Sushant Singh Rajput. Hope I didn't piss you off 🙄. Take care - Call me Karthik 😉🤞 (talk • contribs) 04:11, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mind Adopting me?

Hello there 331dot I've been observing your reviews and the way you have been guiding others I felt is really amazing, I will be pleased to assist you and learn from you , would you mind adopting me? Thanks Suryabeej (talk) 10:59, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I regret that adopting users is not something that I have interest in doing at this time, but you will likely find someone to do so at WP:ADOPT. I can answer specific questions here or at the Teahouse, in a limited fashion. I just can't fit adoptions in right now. 331dot (talk) 12:24, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for guiding me, i hope that Ill be getting someone who can be mu mentor, keep doing the great work Thanks [[Surya^beej]] ^⋠talk⋡ 13:22, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rejecting

After rejecting the article multiple times, you guys think that the nature of my edit gives the impression that i have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting this topic. I would like to clarify that there is no monetary benefit of me promoting the article. I have worked with the Subject in the past and i think it is important for people to know about the person who has so much to educate about yoga, pranayam, meditation etc. In today's time when people are stressed about so much happening around, i think Yoga is something that can help them in multiple ways. Sanjeev Bhanot created Antastha Yoga series that stimulates the central nervous system, develop your inner strength and flexibility, and regenerate you by activating your lifeforce. Antastha Yoga helps you therefore mentally to manage the challenges of meditation & to understand and use the body mind connection for yourself. Physically it increases your flexibility, lowers your blood pressure, reduces stress hormones, improves your joints & muscle toning as well as digestion & sleep, regulates your cardiovascular & hormone system & increases your general energy level. There is so much that the person has contributed on the same and it is extremely disappointing that you, the reviewers on wikipedia think that it is not notable after providing multiple references for the same.

THERE IS NO MONETARY BENEFIT INVOLVED. If wikipedia meeds a monetary benefit from all the articles that gets published, that is a different matter. And if that is the case i would like to spread this information about wikipedia other digital platforms.

Jyotsanaj03 (talk) 15:11, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jyotsana03 If you have no paid or compensated relationship with the subject(which does not have to be a "monetary benefit"), okay. Your actions sent several red flags to the rest of us. You definitely have a conflict of interest that you should formally disclose. As you've been told, the sources you provided do not establish notability as Wikipedia defines it- which may be different from how you or others define it. As you have found, writing a new article is not as easy as it appears- and doing it without experience editing existing articles first often leads to the bad feelings that you have. You are, of course, free to tell others of your views of Wikipedia regardless of their accuracy. 331dot (talk) 16:46, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

If you template 1 warn an individual on UPE, are they allowed to remove it from their tp? Celestina007 (talk) 00:29, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Users are free to remove most content from their user talk pages(there are some specific exceptions). Doing so is considered an acknowledgement that the removed post was read. If a user removes an UPE post and takes no action, that should be treated accordingly. 331dot (talk) 00:53, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pewdiecake2music keeps getting rejected

Can you please help me inprove or aprove my page im begging you— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dogmusic45 (talk • contribs)

Dogmusic45 There is no need to beg; however, as I said, the draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. It appears that this person does not meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable musician, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. There is nothing that you can do to change that at this time.

As you have found out the hard way, successfully writing a new article is one of the absolute hardest things to do on Wikipedia. Diving right in to article creation with your first edit, without an understanding of the process and what exactly goes into a new article, often leads to bad feelings and disappointment as things that you don't understand are happening to something you invested a lot of time in. Users greatly increase their chances of success by first editing existing articles in areas that interest them, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. I would suggest that you spend a few months editing existing articles for that reason, and it will also help you to use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 09:59, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Avignonesi has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Avignonesi. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 12:17, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Ezequiel Matthysse

Thanks! Emat20211 (talk) 14:20, 31 May 2021 (UTC)Enat20211[reply]

Response to Quantized Inertia edit attempt and post

I am trying to respond to a message, but I am not sure if I am in the right place.

I attempted to edit the Quantized Inertia article, as the proponent of the theory is too busy. I am not in his employment. I just follow him in Twitter and offered my help. He tried editing the article and his edit was erased, as was mine, then it was restored.

I will not attempt to edit the article again. Other guys better at this, or Mike himself, will. Thanks for your message and I hope you get my reply.

Best regards,

Jose Lopez

SkyLoop019 If you are not in his employ, you are not a paid editor, but you still have a conflict of interest; that's the case with anyone who communicates with an article subject about an article about them(or something the person is involved with). You may want to let Mike know that he may make formal edit requests on the article talk page, he should avoid direct edits due to his own conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 00:28, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	You wrote such a beautiful paragraph to that person who asked about writing a new article on WP:HELPDESK recently. It seemed so caring and cushioning! I loved it! Abillionradios (talk) 11:04, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You don't think "hypothesis" is more generally accepted in scientific communities? Seriously?

This is an engagement in malicious rhetoric. Do you think people are stupid and do not realize that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark19651965 (talk • contribs)

Mark19651965 What I think doesn't matter, what matters is what independent reliable sources generally state. Wikipedia does not give equal time to all possible theories about a topic, it depends on what sources say. I've said what you can do to demonstrate that, if it's the case. 331dot (talk) 09:16, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The University of Alaska Fairbanks is a reliable source. They were testing a hypothesis. Obviously. But your discussion pages ignore that fact.

This all comes down to ugly rhetorical spin. Language has its own, built-in reliability, independent of "sources". At least it does for reasonable people. For example, a discussion board's use of the word "Truther" pejoratively is evidence of undue bias. Furthermore, "promote" is another incorrect definition of what A&E does. All you need is a dictionary and a grade school education to know that. It is more correct to say: They "advocate".

Look, the presence of undue bias is blatant and that reflects poorly upon Wikipedia. Ultimately, this unprofessionalism undermines user confidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark19651965 (talk • contribs) 09:34, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Address the substantive issues or allow dispute resolution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark19651965 (talk • contribs)

Mark19651965 Please sign your future posts with four tildes(~~~~). Advocation and promotion is semantics. There is no difference as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Wikipedia does not claim to be free of bias, everyone and everything has biases. Any bias in sources will be reflected in Wikipedia. The sources are presented to readers so they can evaluate and judge them for themselves. You are on a course to being blocked if you do not radically change your approach soon. You have been told how you can work on your dispute; you have barely attempted a talk page discussion. 331dot (talk) 09:40, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't truck with threats. And if it is "just semantics" then you won't mind changing it, right? You know, "semantics" is simply a euphemism for "rhetoric" deployed by people who want to deflect their accountability for intentional persuasion and connotation. Mark19651965 (talk) 09:52, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mark19651965 That goes both ways. I've said how you can proceed. I have no further comment. 331dot (talk) 09:57, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't go "both ways". You said it doesn't matter. I say it does. Therefore, logically, you should change, as it doesn't matter to you. Smarten-up.

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Modulus12 (talk) 21:11, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IP is back

5.178.202.10 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), whom you blocked for edit warring 4 days ago[6], is back and continues warring in the same article[7]. It seems the block wasn't effective. Any ideas? — kashmīrī ^TALK 23:17, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked for longer. 331dot (talk) 00:29, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! — kashmīrī ^TALK 21:00, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deborah Jenkins

its me i already started one can you delete it for me please🤗🤗🤗 Deborah Jenkins (talk) 18:13, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can you pls delete my blog for me please🍒🤗🤗🤗... Deborah Jenkins (talk) 18:14, 6 June 2021 (UTC)Debbie J[reply]

Deborah Jenkins You are welcome to remove the content that you placed on your user talk page yourself. If you do not intend to participate in this project to write an encyclopedia, you may request a courtesy vanishing. 331dot (talk) 18:17, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK.So how do i delete it myself? Deborah Jenkins (talk) 18:18, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deborah Jenkins You simply edit the page again but instead of adding content, remove it instead. 331dot (talk) 18:27, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Blaux

Hello, 331dot. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Blaux".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:07, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Came by to say "Hi!" and saw Twinkle left this message from me. I checked and you did have the first edit to this page but you were draftifying the content for another editor. Any way, happy weekend. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:47, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:DeepFriedWaffles

I was clearing out CAT:UNBLOCK when I declined this user's unblock request. I did not notice at the time that you were working on it. You did not place the request on hold.

I did not mean to step on your toes. If you feel differently than me about the outcome, you may revert me and replace the review with your own. I won't mind. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 11:47, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HighInBC No problem. Really the only thing I was waiting for was to decide whether or not to decline it basically as you did or to give them a second chance decline. That's why I didn't place it on hold/idle it. Thanks for letting me know. 331dot (talk) 12:57, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:16ConcordeSSC

Can you redact User:16ConcordeSSC's personal information in Wikipedia talk:Centralized discussion#Semi-protected edit request on 4 June 2021, like you did on Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Urgently need willing mediator? -Apocheir (talk) 00:57, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have done so. 331dot (talk) 06:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For working hard at CAT:UNBLOCK I award you the Admin's barnstar! HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 07:33, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WHY?

you sent me a block warning....but I dont think i did something wrong — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamjeed Ahmed (talk • contribs) 12:54, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You were edit warring and shouting; please contribute to the discussion on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 15:39, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And you have now been blocked. 331dot (talk) 15:40, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2021).

Administrator changes

Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless

Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)

Guideline and policy news

Consensus was reached to deprecate Wikipedia:Editor assistance.
Following a Request for Comment the Book namespace was deprecated.

Technical news

Wikimedia previously used the IRC network Freenode. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the Wikimedia IRC Group Contacts decided to move to the new Libera Chat network. It has been reported that Wikimedia related channels on Freenode have been forcibly taken over if they pointed members to Libera. There is a migration guide and Wikimedia discussions about this.

Arbitration

After a Clarification request, the Arbitration Committee modified Remedy 5 of the Antisemitism in Poland case. This means sourcing expectations are a discretionary sanction instead of being present on all articles. It also details using the talk page or the Reliable Sources Noticeboard to discuss disputed sources.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:45, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hello, I found your name on the top of the list of active Wiki admins, so I thought of messaging you. I am a new Wikipedian, so I am seeking help from you. A few days back, I had seen a place in wikipedia, where one could request for sources. I cannot find it now. Can you give me the link???? Thanks. The Dark Lord Returns To The Earth (talk) 08:45, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Dark Lord Returns To The Earth I don't recall the name of such a page at this moment, though it likely exists. I assume you wish to have help finding sources for the article you recently created. I see that you moved it into the main space yourself- I would advise you to move it back to draft space and run it through Articles for Creation first so that other editors look at it before it is formally an article, and not afterwards. Succeeding at creating a new article is the hardest task to perform on Wikipedia, and diving right in often leads to frustration, disappointment, and other bad feelings that I don't want you to have. 331dot (talk) 08:51, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for telling me. Actually I am a new Wikipedian, and don't know much. I found a video on Wikipedia, and they did like that. And so that is what I did. However I really don't know how to undo it. I would be really glad if you do it for me. Yours sincerely. The Dark Lord Returns To The Earth (talk) 05:30, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting Help Again

What is the legal and right process to challenge and remove unsourced data in Wiki. I mean, can I just remove it, and right 'unsourced' in the edit summary? Thanks again, The Dark Lord Returns To The Earth (talk) 08:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Dark Lord Returns To The Earth Yes, if you see something unsourced, you can remove it with such an edit summary. If the article is about a living person, you actually must remove it, especially if controversial, see the Biographies of Living Persons policy. If others disagree with you, they may restore it, in which case you should discuss it with them on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 08:44, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Mr /Miss Dot. The Dark Lord Returns To The Earth (talk) 08:46, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LG U813 needs to be LG U8138

331dot, Welcome, I have a important notice for you, the notice is: LG U813 just needs to move to LG U8138. 100.11.109.181 (talk) 12:51, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what this means. 331dot (talk) 12:53, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WRONG GRAMMAR: LG U813 → LG U8138. I know that is not correct, but it’s OK to incorrect, someone makes LG U813 as a mistake. That’s OK! Don’t worry you can fix this grammar. 100.11.109.181 (talk) 12:57, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are literally millions of pages on Wikipedia and you are just posting what seems to be random letters and numbers without saying what page or article they are associated with. If the article or page is not protected, you may make the edit yourself. If it is protected, or you feel uncomfortable doing it yourself, you may make a formal edit request on the associated talk page. 331dot (talk) 12:58, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The page is not protected. See at List of LG mobile phones 100.11.109.181 (talk page) 13:03, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, you may proceed as I have stated. 331dot (talk) 13:04, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gremlin

I can't find your reply 331 so posting under help; and shocked how poor wikipedia ux is - the furthest thing from user friendly, I can't think of a website that's worse. Fk. I can't find where you took the time to give me feedback after following the link and searching the title several times. Greatly appreciate you effort, if wikipedia were intuitively designed I might be able to better contribute, as well as others. A basic forum is easier to follow than this. TheGremlin Jun 15,2021

TheGremlin You're probably having trouble because Help Desk posts are archived quickly, you would need to find it in the archives, or examine the edit history of the Help Desk. You can look at your contribution history for help knowing what date to look for(it looks like June 7).

Wikipedia is built for encyclopedia writing more so than it is for communication. The Foundation does work on changes but it is hard to find changes to satisfy millions of people from around the world. 331dot (talk) 21:38, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This link goes to the version of the AFC HD that includes my reply to you. 331dot (talk) 21:44, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Standard Offer

My ban has now expired and I User:Thegameshowlad am requesting a Standard Offer for my account to be unblocked. I have spent the last 6 months in reflection, reading policies thinking about what I did wrong and how to can stop it from happening again, I know policies very well and I think I am capable of been unblocked. I regret my actions and I have learned from them and if you give me a chance I will act in a better manner in future. Yours sincerely 82.41.12.175 (talk) 15:24, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of evading your block to tell me that you wish to appeal, please appeal via WP:UTRS. As you are banned, no administrator can unilaterally lift the block, and a community discussion is required. Make your statement on UTRS and request that it be transferred to a noticeboard. 331dot (talk) 16:24, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not so well as they think. (sigh) --Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:49, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Response: BusinessEnergyQuotes.com draft article rejection

Hi there. Thank you for taking the time to review my draft article.

I totally understand and am aware that I under a conflict of interest when it comes to writing the article. I attempted to follow the guidelines in this page. I disclosed my affiliation with the company in my user page; I have provided five sources to support the content of the article.

What more can I do to put this draft article in a better position for it to be accepted and published?

Thanks.