|
||
Are you a bot.
Title. 176.88.138.142 (talk) 10:50, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
- @176.88.138.142: I am not. Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 10:52, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
Help
Hi Tymon.r, you recently reverted my article because it appeared to be not constructive. Can you please explain? :/ Krystianagiron (talk) 01:08, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
- Krystianagiron, thanks for messaging me. I have reverted your changes, because they were apparently not constructive, i.e. you removed without valid explanation (your edit summary did not match your actual changes) or discussion on article's talk page a big part of the article's content, including references (bibliography). Moreover, you left an unfinished sentence in the article's lead. It looked like a vandalism, so I reverted it. I see it was not your intention to vandalise that page as you have later greatly expanded its content (thanks!). However, while one's patrolling recent changes, he may never know whether an editor is planning to perform subsequent constructive edits or leave an article "as is". As a precaution – for the good of the Wikipedia – it is better to perform a rollback. If you have any questions – ask! Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 09:30, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
Could you please elaborate on your thinking?
Hi, thank you for letting me know about the reversal of my editing. Till Lindemann's recent videos indeed stirred quite a bit of controversy and the fact is integral to characterising his creative approach. Could you please elaborate on your thinking and why you think my suggestion was NOT constructive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DIMmITRYan (talk • contribs) 09:48, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
- DIMmITRYan, thanks for messaging me. You wrote that Lindemann is noted for most recently controversial performances as a porn actor in his own music videos. It's a strong statement which needs to be supported by references in order not to violate the Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living people. Moreover, music videos are, by definition, mostly not intended to share pornographic content. And well, the statement looked derogatory. It looks like you shared your own opinion on Lindemann which it generally prohibited by Wikipedia's policies. Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 09:58, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
- For reference – your changes. Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 10:09, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
how can you say that it does not make sense ???
if the article clearly states that it was made in Menorca, Spain. And, moreover it clearly says that there is evidence for being older, and already spread by the crown of Aragon. Have you even read what it is said in the history of the sauce? It is contradictory with keeping the place of origin in France. Because In the same article states that is NOT from France, only made popular by them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josefco98 (talk • contribs) 14:28, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
Evevate-KHS
- Hello you recently rolled back an edit by User_talk:47.208.168.74, however his recent contribution is infact correct the team has changed their name for 2020. As seen here:https://www.procyclingstats.com/team/elevate-webiplex-pro-cycling-2020
Paulpat99 (talk) 09:45, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
- Paulpat99, thanks for messaging me. Verifiability is one the Wikipedia's pillars. Contributors should add citations of reliable sources for every change they make, so readers can verify the article's content. Introducing unjustified changes to articles' topic names is a common vandalism pattern. 47.208.168.74 did not provide any reference for a change they was introducing, moreover, as a consequence of their (and later your) edit the name in infobox started to be inconsistent with the page's name. That's why I reverted. However, after investigating it further in WP:RS, I appreciate your changes to the article. FYI – I've moved it to its new name (leaving redirect behind). Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 00:40, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
- I will note that for future edits, Paulpat99 (talk) 02:26, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
- Paulpat99, thanks – have a good day! Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 13:46, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
- I will note that for future edits, Paulpat99 (talk) 02:26, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Elaborate on Rollback
Hi Tymon.r, could you explain how to properly submit previous changes made to Casetify? The page is tagged as paid post and advert, despite being rollbacked to the original page creation pre-COI.221.124.42.92 (talk) 11:50, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
- @221.124.42.92: thanks for messaging me. Sure – it is simple – you have not used an edit summary to explain why you're removing maintenance templates. It's a common pattern for some disruptive editors to remove templates informing about problems with articles, so I have reverted your changes, as you at the moment did not provide any explanation. I'd like to encourage you to use valid edit summaries in future! Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 01:28, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Discussion moved to ANI
Hi, the report had been declined at WP:AIV, but since multiple editors have reported the same issue, I have moved it to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#83.6.122.128_reported_by_Mr_Xaero_and_Tymon.r for further input and discussion. Thanks! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:59, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
- @ToBeFree: thanks! Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 13:44, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Counter-Vandalism Unit
Greetings, I saw that you were an instructor for the Counter-Vandalism Unit Academy. I’d like you to mentor me, I’m not that experienced when it comes to fighting vandalism. By the way, I’m Turkish and there’s a 2 hour difference between our time zones. Thanks! Rodrigo Valequez(🗣) 14:07, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
Counter-Vandalism Unit
Hello! My name is Evan and I am interested in helping to fight vandalism on Wikipedia long term. I am decently familiar with Twinkle and warning templates, however I would love to learn all there is to know with those topics in addition to learning how to install and use Huggle. I believe I am two hours ahead of you, and my best time is in the evening after 5PM, or 3PM your time. Hope to hear back from you soon! Evan99m (talk) 20:17, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
CVU training request
Hello Tymon.r , can you please train me in fighting vandalism. I recently had a rollback request denied due to lack of experience. Also, I would like to know the time duration for completion of the course. Thank you. Amkgp (talk) 10:54, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
CVUA
Hi Tymon.r - I've noticed that you haven't edited in a while, and I see that there are a number of requests for CVUA training that you haven't replied to. This is a volunteer project of course, and there's no obligation for you to do anything when you don't have time, but I'm going to take your name off the list of available trainers for now - feel free to put yourself back on it if you become active. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 15:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice
Hi Tymon.r, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.
Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.
To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!
Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, Sam-2727 (talk)
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
You have been pruned from a list
Hi Tymon.r! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed on the AFC's participants list, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 6 months. Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to regain access to the AFCH script, you can do so at any time by visiting WT:AFCP. Thank you for your work at AFC, and if you start editing Wikipedia again we hope you will rejoin us. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:01, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
Your access to AWB may be temporarily removed
Hello Tymon.r! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! — MusikBot II talk 17:11, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
User:182.186.25.146
Your level-3 warning and my block happened at the same time. If you think that editor is worth giving more chances to do something other than post slurs against a minority religion, let me know and I will unblock. DMacks (talk) 23:09, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- @DMacks: Thanks for blocking that editor. I am reverting vandalism using Huggle, so it operates the standard WP:BEFOREBLOCK procedure of four warnings. But in this case, I share your opinion that there is no need for more warnings. Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 23:14, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
A cookie for you!
![]() |
I’ve seen you doing fantastic countervandalism all day. You’ve even beaten me to a few kills :) Keep up the good work. Helen(💬📖) 01:06, 6 August 2021 (UTC) |
WP:AIV
I've noted that many of your reports at AIV should not have been made. There has to be enough vandalism and enough warnings to justify a report, and yours fall short of the mark. For example, Colelknipp, who made only two edits. The first was reverted by you, but you didn't even bother warning the user. The second was reverted by Cluebot with, of course, a warning. Please don't make future reports unless they meet the requirements of the board.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:08, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Bbb23: I have to respectfully disagree. There is no requirement to proceed with the standard 4-warning procedure if it is clear the user in concern is clearly WP:NOTHERE and WP:VOA. And, for the record: Colelknipp was, of course, warned by me - [1], so could you please withdraw your words: "you didn't even bother warning the user"? Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 02:12, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
- I was wrong about you not having warned the user; my eyes glossed over your warning. The rest of your response shows little insight into how AIV is supposed to work. First, it's for "persistent" vandals; two reverts don't constitute persistent. Second, "Except for egregious cases, the user must have been given enough warning(s) to stop their disruptive behavior." This vandalism was run-of-the-mill, not "egregious".--Bbb23 (talk) 02:28, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Bbb23: Firstly, the notice on AIV is not a policy, it is rather a general reminder. Please allow me to refer to the blocking policy – "Some types of user accounts are considered disruptive and may be blocked without warning, usually indefinitely: Accounts used exclusively for disruptive purposes, such as vandalism" (WP:DISRUPTONLY; emphasis added); "(...) warnings are not a prerequisite for blocking (...) users acting in bad faith, whose main or only use is forbidden activity (sockpuppetry, vandalism, and so on), do not require any warning and may be blocked immediately" (WP:BEFOREBLOCK). Secondly, AIV seems to be the right and natural place for reporting persistent, at the moment, (obvious) vandalism-only accounts, definitely better than WP:ANI. Thirdly, I respect and appreciate constructive criticism – it helps everyone to improve. However, comments like "[t]he rest of your response shows little insight into how AIV is supposed to work", in my opinion, are rather unnecessarily patronising and counter-productive. Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 02:43, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
- I was wrong about you not having warned the user; my eyes glossed over your warning. The rest of your response shows little insight into how AIV is supposed to work. First, it's for "persistent" vandals; two reverts don't constitute persistent. Second, "Except for egregious cases, the user must have been given enough warning(s) to stop their disruptive behavior." This vandalism was run-of-the-mill, not "egregious".--Bbb23 (talk) 02:28, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
New page reviewer granted
Hi Tymon.r. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers
" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:
- Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
- You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
- If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
- Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.
The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. signed, Rosguill talk 20:48, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Suspected Sockpuppet
It appears that User:JermalRecords is using a sockpuppet account under the name User:JermalJackson who seems to be constantly vandalizing the Marianas Trench (band) page. Could you look into this?
Why do you nominate the article for deletion
Why do you nominate GenWATT Solar Energy Solutions (Philippines) for deletion. Aside from their official FB Pages, you did not see the post of the President and CEO of GenWATT PH. Please remove it!!!!!!!!!!!!! Adriem915 (talk) 03:00, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
My Article has sources from Google. The company is new, but it is real.
Adriem915 (talk) 03:02, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
I will add this portal to DTI Business Permits here is the link: https://bnrs.dti.gov.ph/search?keyword=Genwatt+solar+power+engineering+services&criteria=exact&sort_by=business_name&sort_order=asc Adriem915 (talk) 03:05, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Adriem915: I did not nominate that article for deletion. If you want to contest this proposition, you are welcome to take part in the discussion and express your concerns there – Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GenWATT Solar Energy Solutions (Philippines). But you must not remove deletion templates from the article. Also, not all companies have to have their page on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a directory. Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 03:06, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
I have a proof of company's existence:
Aside from their official website. How can I reply to the deletion request? Adriem915 (talk) 03:10, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
As of now, I am adding sources to it. Adriem915 (talk) 03:12, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Adriem915: I've given you the link you can use to access the deletion discussion and present all your arguments. The link, again – Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GenWATT Solar Energy Solutions (Philippines). You may want to read Help:My article got nominated for deletion!. Yes, you can keep improving the article and try to demonstrate the subject's notability. But do not remove the deletion templates ({{afd}}, etc.). Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 03:16, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021
Hello Tymon.r,
Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.
Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.
At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.
There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.
If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.
Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:33, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
November 2021 backlog drive
New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive | |
| |
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. |
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
Fusee
I think you may have Huggled an edit I made – slightly clumsily – to this topic. I’m not going to re-instate it now.
A fusee is not strictly conical, the shape of the curve is an arc of an hyperbola. I don’t have time to find a decent source, or to derive the mathematics, so I shall leave it as inaccurate. My insertion of the word “roughly“ was however thoroughly justified, and I’m sorry you changed it.
If you are innocent of this interference, please accept my apologies! Regards 86.137.177.201 (talk) 21:03, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
Help me contribute
Dear Tymon.r, Please tell me some reliable sources i can use for citing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Applebottomsalafi (talk • contribs) 17:16, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
- Dear @Applebottomsalafi: Thank you for your message. Please read our guidelines about reliable sources. They should be independent, not biased, and, preferably, with some authority. If you can find reliable sources which actually say that the war concluded with Egyptian victory – go ahead, make your change, and added in references. However, if there are no such sources (for example, because it is only your opinion) or there are different sources (of similar importance) which make opposite opinions, you may be better leaving the page as it is – with the ceasefire option. We must adhere to the neutral point of view principle. Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 17:21, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Dear Tymon.r, does this count as a reliable source: https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/the-libyan-egyptian-war-forty-years-later-how-it-represented-a-rift-in-the-arab-world
In the 4th paragraph it says: " but Egyptian forces and their firepower were several times greater and they were able to decisively defeat the Libyan military in every battle". Is this valid? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Applebottomsalafi (talk • contribs) 17:39, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
- Dear @Applebottomsalafi: I appreciate the time you took to actually look for sources and that you are trying to resolve this in accordance to the Wikipedia's policies. Unfortunately, I am not quite sure that the source you provided is saying that the Egyptian won. It says that they had greater power than their opponents and were able to defeat Libyan – not that they did actually defeat them. I am not an expert, but it looks like the war concluded with just ceasefire. Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 17:43, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Different subject:
Does this source say prove that the egyptian won the yom kippur war:
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_Kippur_War — Preceding unsigned comment added by Applebottomsalafi (talk • contribs) 18:04, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
- To clarify about the Four Day War thing, most of the sources provided by Applebottomsalafi would not meet WP:RS; onwar is a random website and Military Watch Magazine suspiciously has no bylines, listed editorial staff, or even an address, it seems like a fancy blog. I do not recall the English version of Tribal Politics in the Borderland of Egypt and Libya saying anything about an Egyptian victory. -Indy beetle (talk) 18:13, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Indy beetle: Yup. Even if they actually claimed Egyptian victory, they still would fail the WP:RS standard. But as they don't really make such a claim, it was not necessary to consider that. Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 18:15, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Dear Tymon.r, So i cant change the yom kippur war result?, If the source i provided proves that the egyptians won the yom kippur war, Can u change the result?, My account is not extended confirmed. Source: https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_Kippur_War
Thank you for ur time Tymon.r
Message
Hi Tymon.r, you left today (10.2.2022) a note on my talk, as I edited a wikipedia entry that some other people (I don't know who) had created about me. It had the maintanance note that it's lacking references and other information, so I added those by editing the page. Please do not delete the page. Perhaps you can compare the page made by other people, and the additions that I put there, and see whether they are ok? From the references given, it should be now clear that it fulfils the Wikipedia criteria. talkPtorma (talk) 17:57, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Ptorma: Hello, thank you for your message. As I've mentioned on your talk page, I am not disputing the notability of yourself. I admire your scientific achievements. Your additions look good to me – thank you for them. The policy of not editing articles about oneself is here for a simple reason – very often articles' subjects can't adhere to our principles of neutral point of view am impartiality. I am not saying that your edits violated those principles. However, it is generally suggested that any further edits are rather left for others to be made, just to avoid any confusion or problems. Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 18:03, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Thank you very much, everything clear now! Best,Ptorma — Preceding undated comment added 18:08, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
I WASN'T DOING VANDALISM
I was just adding infi 2800:E2:407F:FEA2:8D02:8E18:AD2:66E1 (talk) 18:06, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
@2800:E2:407F:FEA2:8D02:8E18:AD2:66E1: which edit of yours are you referring to? Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 18:07, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Help with suggested edits
Dear Tymon.r, would you mind reviewing the suggested edits on Tina Malti's talk page? You previously provided advice on how to navigate editing articles on living persons, we would appreciate your help with this! [1] TinaMalti (talk) 20:58, 25 February 2022 (UTC)