User talk:Pantherslair

Odyssey 5

Although it is admirable that you share such a passion for this show, you are going about it the wrong way to bring attention to it by seeking to put an entry into Wikipedia about it. Everytime you do it, your edit will be reverted. If you continue to add it in, you will eventually be blocked for edit warring. Wikipedia is not a site for advocacy. If the petition managed to gain some sort of widespread mainstream coverage it would be considered worthy of inclusion into the article. As it stands, it is completely not notable and regardless of how passionate you or the other "thousands upon thousands of die hard fans all over the world" are about the show, it does not merit an entry into the article. This is unfortunately the way of Wikipedia's policies. This is not about lack of "compassion" or "heart" as no editor has anything against the show, but it is the requirement of all editors on Wikipedia to follow its policies and guidelines. I highly recommend that you read the links that I have added above. Should you continue to edit war the inclusion of the link into the article, you will be blocked. Please consider this a friendly warning and not a threat as I am not an administrator and do not possess the privileges to impose a block, but any editor may request that an admin review your edits and if you are determined to be edit warring, the block will be levied. Blackmane (talk) 14:59, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Stuart Rudd (musician) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Stuart Rudd (musician) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stuart Rudd (musician) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 23:45, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: STEREO 10 (August 6)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing was:

This is not a viable draft for a finished article. Please see WP:YFA for advice on article creation, and WP:REFB on correct referencing using inline citations and footnotes.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Pantherslair/STEREO 10 and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:22, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pantherslair! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:22, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Pantherslair. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. This is regarding STEREO 10. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:56, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023

Hello Pantherslair. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Pantherslair. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Pantherslair|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:56, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Stereo 10 Brisbane

Hello, Pantherslair. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Stereo 10 Brisbane, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:06, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Stereo 10 Brisbane

Hello, Pantherslair. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Stereo 10 Brisbane".

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. When 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!} 16:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ranks

Please note that we only capitalise ranks on Wikipedia if they appear before someone's name. Otherwise they are not regarded as proper names, despite the common military convention of capitalising them. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:19, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As an English Major, you are disrespecting the title and rank of these personnel. It is no different to respecting a Doctor or a Professor, a Captain or a General with a capital letter. I suggest you go and do your research on the appropriate and respectful usage of capital letters at the beginning of an official title or in this case rank. Considering you have been disrespectful in removing these without contacting me first, these capital letters will be returned and will continue to be returned every time they are changed. Pantherslair (talk) 15:56, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I informed you of the situation politely and you have responded impolitely. It is no different to respecting a Doctor or a Professor, a Captain or a General with a capital letter. And we don't capitalise them either! Considering you have been disrespectful in removing these without contacting me first, these capital letters will be returned and will continue to be returned every time they are changed. I have no idea why you think changing your edits back to the correct form is in any way disrespectful or that there is any requirement for you to be contacted first. I think you probably need to read up on Wikipedia etiquette before editing again. Please note that if you continue to edit like this you will be blocked for disruption. You have been warned. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:48, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My response was absolutely in no way impolite and I take offence to any suggestion otherwise. We also speak and communicate here in Australia in what is known as 'Proper English' where titles or positions and ranks are given the due respect that they deserve with a capital letter. In countries like America these rules of grammatical correctness and spelling are quite often ignored, because they have a disdain for anything that is associated with the origins of the English language which is Great Britain, with reference to the War of Independence and their hatred of the English. I also find it abhorrent behaviour for you to think you have some god given right to threaten me or warn me with bans or blocks because you disagree with my position on this issue, based on my education. In simple terms, how dare you try and use intimidating, aggressive tactics by threatening me and I will investigate ways to have you reported for your behaviour! Pantherslair (talk) 20:07, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You really do not learn, do you? Your attitude is arrogant and entitled. You need to learn how to speak to people. You need to learn that conventions on Wikipedia have been established by discussion over many years and should not be arbitrarily changed because an editor disagrees with them. Please see MOS:MILTERMS and MOS:PEOPLETITLES. This is not me personally disagreeing with you; it is you going against established convention. I realise that you may not have understood that you were editing against convention, and that's fine, but after being informed you then proceeded to state you would continue to do so, further stated that it was disrespectful for you not to be consulted before your changes were reverted (although I notice you did not yourself feel you needed to consult anyone before making the changes in the first place!) and reacted with disdain when politely informed that this was not the way things were done on Wikipedia. As an administrator I am perfectly entitled to warn you that ongoing behaviour like this is unacceptable. I have no intention of blocking you for your poor attitude towards me, but I shall most certainly block you if you continue to change articles from the form that has been established in the MOS after being informed what that is, as this is disruptive behaviour. And finally, incidentally, I am myself English, not American, and I most certainly speak 'proper English'! -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:26, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]