User talk:Nathan868
Welcome
[edit]
|
|
Hi Nathan868! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:30, 4 March 2019 (UTC) |
Important Notice
[edit]
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in Falun Gong. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Doug Weller talk 12:57, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
ANI Notice
[edit]
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. :bloodofox: (talk) 05:31, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
Non-English sources
[edit]I have not reverted you since the text has been changed by you and others so I'm not sure if it still verifies the change since I don't understand Italian and trying to verify it still does seems a waste of time compared to looking for an English source. But please don't do this again [1]. Per WP:Non-English sources, non-English sources are perfectly acceptable here. We prefer English sources when they are of equal quality and I agree we should be able to find English sources for the information that was there but until someone does you should not remove reliable sources and tag something as needing citation simply because the sources are not in English. If you have doubts that the sources verify what is in the text, feel free to request a translated quote. Alternatively find replacement English sources yourself. But do not remove sources for not being in English. As always, it's fine to remove non-reliable sources, so sources like Epoch Times and travel blogs can be removed whatever language they are in. So too could AsiaNews for something like this. Frankly that section was citation overkill anyway. However la Repubblica for example seems a perfectly acceptable RS even if it is in Italian. Nil Einne (talk) 12:20, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
- Also if you have to remove some sources for being unreliable and can't be confident the remaining sources fully verify the cited text because you can't read the sources, you still should not be removing the remaining ones. Instead tag the text as {{verification needed}} and explain either in the reason field or in the article talk page or both what the problem is. That way someone can fix it either by confirming the remaining sources are sufficient, or by finding replacement ones of equal quality that they can read hopefully in English. If you want to be more pro-active, then seek out someone who can read the language help verify the content, perhaps whoever added the source if they are still active. Alternatively seek out a replacement source yourself. Nil Einne (talk) 12:45, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
November 2021
[edit]
Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to COVID-19 pandemic in mainland China, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 01:46, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
- My bad, must have checked it by accident along with "watch this page". Nathan868 (talk) 07:07, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 |
February 2022
[edit] Hello, I'm NoonIcarus. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. NoonIcarus (talk) 13:12, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
[edit]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) 01:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
edit war
[edit]
Your recent editing history 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; read about 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., and read WP:ONUS. Slatersteven (talk) 12:56, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Happy to discuss my changes on the relevant talk page Nathan868 (talk) 13:08, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
- You should have done that before you reverted. It is down to you to get wp:consensus. Slatersteven (talk) 13:18, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
- Slatersteven is correct here. You need to get consensus for your change. You don't get to try to WP:EW it through, then argue why it is correct. Adoring nanny (talk) 14:56, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
[edit]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) 00:52, 28 November 2023 (UTC)