User talk:Soetermans

Warning

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Please stop mass reverting edits of new users, especially when their edits are correct and the categories they add apply. Consistently Heinous (talk) 19:45, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

You've been asked before to stop unnecessarily adding WikiProject tags to talk pages. You've been issued a final warning already. Do you think this is the right way to go? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 20:32, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

THANK YOU FOR SAYING THIS! He just did this to me about The Simpsons. He obviously thinks that because im newer to Wikipedia that i am wrong. I do know what im doing when it comes to stuff like this. Please just stop. ßåtrøşë (talk) 08:21, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Hey Batrose, maybe double check before you start chiming in: the user Consistently Heinous made several inappropriate edits and were temporarily blocked for it. I issued you a final warning. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 12:10, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

ok sorry ßåtrøşë (talk) 05:26, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

It seems to be a common trend look at the sources before playing games Inteqaam (talk) 18:04, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

• sigh* you're also unnecessarily chiming in. After Consistently Heinous was blocked for 72 hours, Batrose is blocked indefinitely from editing the article on The Simpsons. Double-check, would you? You've been here less than a month. I don't play games. I will revert any unnecessary edit. End of story. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 18:28, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

  I chimed in because I noticed a trend as you reverted three edits which were done to counter vandalism and I am not aware of the other users and what they did. Inteqaam (talk) 19:26, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User_talk:Atmospherpolyphonic

Mentioned you here, so just flagging as a courtesy. Of course the issue is not remotely with your conduct. Have a great evening. Star Mississippi 01:40, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the notification. El C closed the discussion already, which I found too hastily, since Atmospherpolyphonic's latest comments. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK}`

That thoroughly unraveled after I logged off for the evening. Thank you @Black Kite and Isabelle Belato: for handling and sorry you had to be subject to their escalation Soetermans. Star Mississippi 14:21, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Same here. Apologies I wasn't around to chime in for round two, I had fallen asleep by that point. Sergecross73 msg me 14:41, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Star Mississippi and Sergecross73:, thank you both for your messages. No apologies needed, you were both very supportive of me and very patient with Atmospherpolyphonic. Too bad it ended this way. Another question though, should I take action (or preemptive action) for their threats on scholarly research with me as a subject? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 18:57, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

I personally wouldn't worry about it. We don't even really know that he's a college student at all, all we know is that he claims to be. He certainly didn't act like he was was some sort of scholarly writer or college student. It might have just been a "flex" he was using to make it sound like he knew what he was talking about. And even if he was, there's still the possibility that he loses interest or fails to get it published. He certainly wasn't one for details or providing evidence. You could always remove your full name from your user page for a while if you're concerned. Sergecross73 msg me 19:23, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right. Thanks for the reassurance. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 19:36, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Missed these. Seconding @Sergecross73 here. While I don't think there was anything at all wrong to your actions -- even if there was, a college student's thesis isn't going to get articles written about systemic biases in Wikipedia that haven't been covered before in instances where it was an issue. That said, I've been harassed here before and I understand your concern. Blank your name if you're feeling worried, but I otherwise wouldn't stress it. Star Mississippi 15:43, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

"SQ/200" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect SQ/200 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 18 § SQ/200 until a consensus is reached. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 09:53, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

GTA San Andreas

Regarding your note on revision history, I am not adding anything new I added back what was removed without consensus, it is the one who removed the info without consensus that should ask for consensus, I merely added back info that was there even few days ago and had stayed for a long time, things about vehicles and all, but yeah selectively choose me to seek consensus, when I reverted it to OG state not added new info, as per rules the one who had removed long time established info should go consensus, anyway good day. Dilbaggg (talk) 03:18, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Appreciation and point of constructive feedback

Soetermans, I want to say that I greatly appreciate your numerous and lengthy history of contributions to the wikipedia community. Although I have used wikipedia for 20 years, I had never created a username and I had only begun editing articles 18 months ago. I am writing to let you know of my experience with the process of communication as a mature person, but also a novice to wikipedia. On January 18th and 19th, I made a series of edits to the plot synopsis for the movie cast away. Initially I made a large edit that included stylistic changes to improve clarity, deletions to remove unnecessary text, additions to crucial elements of the plot, and factual corrections for accuracy. You reverted that almost instantly. So I changed strategies to make series of smaller edits. After reverting several of those as well. I made a "salty" edit summary "No one should care about Bettina Peterson's name. It's inconsequential." You then reverted that as well. The rationale given to reverting my edits was that they were not improvements or were unnecessary. You then sent a message to my IPs talk page. In the immediate aftermath of your reversions of what I considered to be generally thought-out, reasoned, and documented edits, I interpreted your message as discourteous and borderline rude. I was earnestly upset.

But, upon reflection clearly your message was boilerplate used because of your workload to the community. (Thank you again). And it seems like you have several versions depending on the nature of the situation. Anyway, at the end of your message about my edits not being constructive, you wrote "If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page." As your page is semi-protected due to past vandalism, any user that wishes to reply to your message must make a username, make 10 edits, and wait four days (actually 96 hours). Although likely an important step to limit the number of random IP talk pages that you might need to monitor, when I was denied the ability to respond, I was not sure if your direction for me to post to your talk page was an intentional slight meant to indicate that my involvement and edits didn't matter. Although I contend that a jeep is not a truck, and construction of something is different than construction on something, I now feel that corresponding about that communication process is more important than discussing the merits of my proposed edits to cast away's plot synopsis.

While its arguably better that I've had two weeks to think about this response, I believe that directing communication to your semi-protected talk page from individuals who edit wikipedia without an account, to be problematic. It disadvantages these new users. As the notification that the user cannot post is immediate on your talk page, it can be interpreted as either passive aggressive or at least a "mixed message." Since users then do not feel that they can talk to you, it incentivizes making additional edits and corresponding through the edit summaries, which is inappropriate and as I understand it undesirable within this community. So I have a suggestion for you. Change the language of your message to, "If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page or reply to this message on your own talk page."

With appreciation and respect from one beer guy to another,

Adonjay (talk) 06:34, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi Adonjay, thank you for your message and feedback, I appreciate you taking the time. I am away for the weekend with my family and probably won't be able to reply properly. If I can't reply this weekend, I'll be sure to do so early next week. Have a great weekend yourself and happy editing in the meantime. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 07:18, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Soetermans,

Not a problem. Thanks for letting me know and for the well wishes. I already found another typo!

Enjoy the time with family. Adonjay (talk) 07:57, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi Adonjay, sorry for my late reply. The little one came down with chicken pox. I'm exhausted. Thank you again for the message. Where to begin? I'll start off with the easiest to answer: my talk page. Since you've been here for such a long time already, I might unnecessarily retell you some information. Sorry about that.

You can check a page's history at the 'history' tab. This goes for articles, talk pages or Wikipedia pages. See my talk page history. I've had several pesky IP hopping editors that were leaving stupid messages, which you can still see (the same "Bans & blocks won't stop me", again and again - well, a block did stop them). However, there was another that made completely unacceptable comments. Extremely inappropriate. I was being WP:HOUNDed. Those have been redacted. I myself can't even look them up anymore. The edit protection ends early July, I'm curious to see if the harassment will continue or if they've finally moved on.

Speaking of privacy and not being hounded, I myself am open where I'm from (see my userpage, I am writing this in Utrecht, the Netherlands), but you haven't done so publicly. If you go to your IP address' page, there is the WHOIS link, showing your IP address' real-world location. You might want to remove any mention of your IP address, but that's up to you. I respect your privacy and haven't looked up where you're from, you could be living around the corner or on the other side of the world. I am friendly with Anarchyte, and administrator (or "admin") who might be willing to help out if needed.

Now, to address the issue, I owe you an apology. Checking your edits to Cast Away, there was no need to right out revert your edits. You did after all changed some typos and improved the article. I have been told before I can be curt. Wikipedia has no deadline and there should have been no rush on my part to just undo your edit straight away. Thank your for pointing that out.

Finally, I really appreciate you taking the time to write me such a long message. I hope you'll find Wikipedia to your liking. Not only do we need people enthusiastic to help improve articles, we also need patient people in this community. Welcome! soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 20:07, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

P.S. Articles on beer on Wikipedia however are not up to standard... I you have the time and energy, those articles can be definitely be improved. I am certified beer sommelier and I've got around 70 books about beer, brewing, beer and food, beer travel, etc., but I mainly just edit video game related articles.

Soetermans,

I am sorry to hear that your child had the chicken pox. Neither of my kids have had chickenpox yet. But, anytime either a child or parent is sick, it's exhausting.

From the history of your talk page, I can see that you've had your hands full. I had not heard of hounding before, but it sounds similar to inflammatory and harassment behaviors I have seen in other communities, including an email list I moderated for many years. It must have been a total pain and clearly still has you a bit weary.

In terms of privacy, I am fairly private online including social media. I linked to my IP address so that you could know I was one and the same person when I posted this. I didn't want to be cryptic in my post or make it a lot of effort for you. Now that you know what my experience was, I may de-link my IP's talk page from this post. Even then, I am sure many savvy folks would figure it out. Although my IP address is dynamic, it tends to remain the same over times. Honestly, I have not decided how much I want to share in wikipedia, which is why I have not yet added information to my profile.

An apology is not necessary, but I do accept it. I just wanted to let you know my experience. Although reverting edits is quick, it does feel like rejection to newbies. It's possible that retaining a users good-faith edits where possible may help reduce the need to communicate on talk pages. I really liked your link about how wikipedia has no deadline. If reverting, the use of qualifying language in the edit summary may help temper the feeling of rejection or mitigate disputes, "mostly, unnecessary edits," "most edits do not meet content standards," or "introduced ambiguous language." Qualifications could help direct new (earnest) users to more desirable edits. All that being said, if you've been dealing with vandals, hounders, cyber-thugs you might not have the energy.

Overall, I appreciate your response and your welcome. In the last few weeks I have gotten more familiar with wikipedia's standards and practices, revision histories, and talk pages. Although I have a lot more reading to do, I look forward to making more contributions. Sometimes the improvements are obvious. I'll take a look at beer/brewery pages. I didn't see any in the review queue and I hadn't really considered them. I might start with Alaskan Brewing Company.

Well wishes from the North, Adonjay (talk) 06:56, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi Adonjay, I've been mulling it over, I will probably start editing and improving beer-related articles next year. It is a while to go, but I'm still busy with my studies. Looking back, I can tell you I wish I picked a more anonymous username. I don't know if Adonjay is your real name, or maybe it's an anagram or something, but at least you've not made it public who you are. Soetermans is my actual last name and on my userpage I say where I'm from, there have been instances I wish I didn't share that information (see for instance the incident where another threatened to write about Wikipedia and me personally because I nominated their article for deletion. Great stuff.) soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 07:19, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

thanks for your help!

Falconik123 (talk) 21:52, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Oh hey Falconik123, sorry for my late reply, I saw your message and it slipped my mind. You're welcome, thanks again for starting the article. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 07:19, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Removal of content on American Truck Simulator

Hey there! I noticed you removed a big chunk of content on American Truck Simulator. I do agree that it did rely heavily on primary sources (I agree that the Trucks section was completely unnecessary, maybe not so much the states section but I'm not gunna argue on that), however do you think the map would be of use in the article? I feel it would be helpful to illustrate how much of the US the game currently has rather than a simple "The game is expanded up to the Midwest" which is somewhat vague as the Midwest is made up of multiple different states. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{blaze__wolf} 20:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Blaze Wolf, thanks for reaching out. I'm not entirely convinced a map as a visual representation of the in-game locations is needed, but if you think it's necessary I won't object to readding it. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 21:51, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tom & Jerry (2021 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tom Jones.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:07, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Cozy games specify

Hey hey. Just saw your tag at the Cozy game article. I'm not sure how I can specify it further, the citation itself says "dozens" within. Is there something from the article I can use to change? Not sure how I can adjust this for you. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:46, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Andrzejbanas! Put dozens in quotation marks ("dozens"), then it's clear it is cited. Easy solution! soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 19:09, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

oh gladly! will do. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:11, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Do not revert my (and others) edits on Ultrakill

I removed the stylization besides the parenthesized note, this is standard (see Doom page). I do not think it is necessary or in good faith to revert the entire paragraph of updated story me and other editors had put. While it was inflated at first, I and others fixed it to be concise and reasonable. This is a video game in early access, it receives updates, this is why the page did not previously contain a section on the final war. I have also noticed that you constantly revert articles often with no real reason, other then when the accounts are newer or because for whatever reason you believe that it was not necessary. You have also stated in a topic that you do not play games, it does not make since for you to arbitrate the necessity of a story you neither know, or care about. If you have complaints about my edits please either make a proper edit, or go to the Ultrakill talk page and ask other editors what they think. Hellaciousphlegm (talk) 17:21, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

I apologize for saying "you do not play video games", you do I misunderstood a previous section on your talk page. However I still would like if you stopped reverting my edits. Hellaciousphlegm (talk) 17:30, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Hellaciousphlegm, I woke up to three discussions. I'll try to reply properly later today. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 08:58, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Hellaciousphlegm, first thing I'm going to do is make one topic instead of three. Please note that to discuss the subject (or any article for that matter) can be discussed on its talke page (Talk: Ultrakill), your editing and attitude can be discussed at your talk page and issues you have with me and my editing can be discussed here. Since you already started these, I'll just reply here.

To go through your revision:

• As a short descripton, a "2020 first-person movement shooter" is not a thing. We also don't add a full stop to a short description
• There is no need to mention an ALL CAPITAL LETTERS style, not in the lead and definitely not in the article. Same goes for mentiong Doom Eternal.
• Dante's Divine Comedy implies, well, the work Divine Comedy by Dante. Previously it said "Dante's layers of Hell", that's more specific and unambiguous
• A plot section does not need a {{cn}} tag. The work itself is the basis for the plot description.
• Fictional elements, like the New Peace and Final War, are not writting in italics
• Assume the reader knows what is meant by "Hell". If a link is needed, one is sufficient, not three in close repetition.
• The Final War subsection reads like backstory. Ask yourself: to understand Ultrakill, is it necessary for the general reader to know about its fictional history as well? Probably not, but if it is, a short 'premise' is the proper way to do that.

I apologize for some of my behavior, it had stemmed from a misunderstanding from a issue on your talk page . Please reply to my talk page with a precise issue that you have. I do not believe the "plot is bloated" I'm not even sure you've played this game? Despite being a self-proclaimed video game philosopher I find it strange you want to remove important information, also I do not want to have a edit war I just want this to be resolved in a way that does not involve reverting the whole page. Hellaciousphlegm (talk) 17:34, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Who decides it is "important information"? We go by reliable sources. I haven't played the game, no. Matter of fact: I haven't played most games there are article on. I just try to follow guidelines.

i removed it while i find a source or reason to include it. thank you for your constructive feedback, i apologize for my behavior, and attempt to edit war. Hellaciousphlegm (talk) 18:13, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

No worries, I see that you've been blocked for edit warring for a 24 hour period, which should end soon by now. The bold, revert, discuss cycle is an easy way of establishing consensus. Hope this helps. If there are any question, feel free to ask. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 11:03, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

An apology for edit warring

Soetermans, I apologize for the recent edit warring with you and other editors at A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. Thank you for calling me out for violating the WP:3RR. Will be more mindful about the guidelines. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 14:52, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Cinosaur! No worries, it's alright. While edit warring is never a good idea, I do agree that Prabhupada can most definitely be improved. If I ever get the time, I'll try to go over your revision. Good to have you back! Thanks, and happy editing. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 00:14, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. The draft is back in my sandbox. Will be grateful for any feedback and suggestions towards its improvement. Cinosaur (talk) 15:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

April 2024

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Atomic Heart. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 16:42, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Oh hey Bbb23, usually I am pretty careful in these cases (for instance, Prabhupada and just today the Hillsborough disaster), but I completely forgot my initial revert, sorry about that! When my block is ended I'll be more careful.

I've been editing for nearly 18 years, and now I am being blocked. I am kind of disappointed in myself! Different question, if it's not too much of a hassle, I recall being shortly blocked some years ago because of a weird IP thing, can you tell if this is a first "true" block? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 17:18, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

As I read it, the block back in August 2023 does not appear to have been an erroneous block, e.g., a misclick, but a rather quick reversal based on WP:3RRNO. As far as being "pretty careful", I suggest you restrict yourself to no more than 2 reverts in a 24-hour period; that way you won't find yourself in trouble because you forgot the count. Take care.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:45, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

I won't hit you with this but I leave it open for anyone whose braver than me to. Panini! • 🥪 05:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Xenoblade Article Introduction

I feel like if you think the wording is an issue then you're fully free to change it to something you think is more fitting, obviously I don't know how you think so I'll just be guessing if my prose meets your standards. I personally think however that it's better to have information that is worded slightly awkwardly than information that is demonstrably incorrect and perpetuates misinformation. ExceedCharge (talk) 07:19, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi ExceedCharge, what is the misinformation here? Maybe I'm not getting it, but isn't the basic information near-identical? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 08:01, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

The idea that Project Rainfall "got Xenoblade localised" instead of just released. A large part of why Project Rainfall existed in the first place was due to the fact that Nintendo of Europe had already put in the effort to localise and release the game, and acting as if Rainfall was the reason it got localised is to ignore the efforts put by the actual localisation team. ExceedCharge (talk) 10:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)