User talk:Alex Devens

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Alex Devens! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! CoolSkittle (talk) 08:30, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Contributing to Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Directories and indexes Where to: ask questions • make requests Tip of the day Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper)
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

September 2019[edit]

Hi Alex Devens, I'm Vanamonde93. You'll likely not be pleased about this but I have removed some of your edits because they reveal too much personally identifiable information about you. We have a policy of protecting editors' safety by hiding such information if they share it. I'm really sorry about having to suppress your edits, and I know it's annoying, but it's for the best. Please don't re-add the information. For some useful information on privacy and safety, you can take a look at Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors and Wikipedia:On privacy, confidentiality and discretion. Thank you, and sorry for messing about with your edits! Vanamonde (Talk) 19:43, 20 September 2019 (UTC) Vanamonde (Talk) 19:43, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

don't mind, appreciate it actually Alex Devens (talk) 22:40, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2019[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Impeachment inquiry against Donald Trump. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. - Mr X 🖋 12:11, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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 post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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.

- Mr X 🖋 12:13, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Thanos (Marvel Cinematic Universe) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Thanos (Marvel Cinematic Universe) 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/Thanos (Marvel Cinematic Universe) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Praxidicae (talk) 20:19, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2019[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 (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed. 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.

--Jorm (talk) 16:27, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Greta Thunberg. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 17:41, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop with the personal attacks and name calling[edit]

You have multiple times in recent days resorted to personal attacks and name calling of others, such as here where you call someone "asshole" and here where you call someone "creep". Wikipedia has a policy against this. Please read Wikipedia:No personal attacks and familiarize yourself with the policy. Be aware that continued incivility and personal attacks of this nature can lead to you being blocked from editing Wikipedia. If you would like to remain a productive contributor, I suggest you temper the way you interact with others and use more collegial language in the future. --Jayron 32 17:50, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. Alex Devens (talk) 12:50, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

so much for that agreement. im not reporting you, but i hope you can learn why this is wrong without some authority rubbing your face in it. please dont do this.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:22, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

blocked[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jayron 32 12:51, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You were warned previously about personal attacks. This was over the line. --Jayron 32 12:50, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Personal attack" is quite subjective. It sounds to me like a deliberately vague term designed to protect the feelings of fragile editors. Is there a set of guidelines, perhaps, that I could read to determine what exactly constitutes a "personal attack"? Alex Devens (talk) 14:23, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The policy is linked in the section immediately above this one. --Jayron 32 14:25, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, since you seem to have some objections, I have started a thread at WP:ANI seeking input from others. If you have any comments at any time you would like to be added to that thread, you can indicate that here and I can copy your comments to that discussion. --Jayron 32 14:34, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I actually appreciate all your consideration in this. When I left that comment on User:Mercurywoodrose's talk page, I wasn't thinking at all about the previous warnings I had received for personal harassment. In fact, I was barely thinking at all. I just saw his user page and was so taken aback by what I saw that I felt as though I had to say something, although looking back on it, it's clear to me now that I didn't really have to say anything. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, and they should be allowed to express those opinions however they please, even if it's in a way that I personally think is over-the-top. That being said, I think there should be consistency regarding what are and aren't personal attacks on Wikipedia. The user page of the person in question included, in particular, a statement strongly implying that all members of the Republican Party (of which I am one) are "idiots." He also explicitly said "FU" to me in response to my message on his talk page, a far less than subtle euphemism of "fuck you." If, however, the powers-that-be at Wikipedia decide that my comment was over the line and his weren't, then I'll just shut up and take the ban for a month. This isn't the outcome I want, but it's certainly the one I expect the most. I can only do so much to defend my character, but I'm just one person (a person with a history of anger-fueled lapses in judgement, no less), and if enough people come to the conclusion that my character is not welcome and my behavior is unacceptable, I will begrudgingly accept those results. Alex Devens (talk) 14:50, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have copied these comments over. If, at any point, you have additional comments or wish to respond to anyone who has left a comment at the WP:ANI thread in question, I will also add your responses. --Jayron 32 15:30, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Preesh. Hopefully we can get this whole thing sorted out (which, ideally for me, would be in my favor, but if the consensus goes the other way around, then so be it). Alex Devens (talk) 15:37, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Bernoulli-Doppler-Leidenfrost-Peltzman-Sabir-Whorf-Dunning-Kruger-Stroop effect for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bernoulli-Doppler-Leidenfrost-Peltzman-Sabir-Whorf-Dunning-Kruger-Stroop effect 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/Bernoulli-Doppler-Leidenfrost-Peltzman-Sabir-Whorf-Dunning-Kruger-Stroop effect until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Hog Farm (talk) 19:20, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

aww man Alex Devens (talk) 19:21, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Bernoulli-Doppler-Leidenfrost-Peltzman-Sapir-Whorf-Dunning-Kruger-Stroop effect[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Bernoulli-Doppler-Leidenfrost-Peltzman-Sapir-Whorf-Dunning-Kruger-Stroop effect requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://xkcd.com/1531/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Schazjmd (talk) 19:41, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"~~ StAr TrEk InTo DaRkNeSs ~~" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect ~*~ StAr TrEk InTo DaRkNeSs ~*~. Since you had some involvement with the ~*~ StAr TrEk InTo DaRkNeSs ~*~ redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Jorm (talk) 23:08, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect has now been tagged for speedy deletion under G4. Glades12 (talk) 05:37, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Hog Farm (talk) 23:56, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for blatant violations of the no personal attacks policy despite previous warnings.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~ mazca ^talk 00:38, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Given your acknowledgement of your previous 1-month block for repeated personal attacks despite warnings, and the general agreement about that block at ANI, I do not see any reasonable outcome of this other than blocking you indefinitely. If you cannot handle disagreements without calling people "awful human beings [who should] kindly burn in hell" then it does not appear you are capable of productively building a collaborative encyclopedia. I am open to this block being reduced if another admin is willing to grant another chance, but it very much seems to me you have had sufficient chances here. ~ mazca ^talk 00:41, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ping Mazca, I'm pretty sure that User:Wolfssalt is a sock, given that they're making the same edits.--Jorm (talk) 20:00, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, what will it finally take for you to leave me the hell alone? You and Hog Farm have succeeded in getting me indefinitely blocked (which I’m sure gives you some kind of sick satisfaction) and I have nothing to do with Wolfssalt. So please, enough is enough. Leave me alone. Wolfssalt (talk) 20:08, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"I am not Wolfssalt", he said, logged into the Wolfssalt account. --Jorm (talk) 20:11, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wolfssalt is am Architect 134 sock, not Alex Devens. This is there M.O.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:13, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I literally have never heard of Wolfssalt and have nothing to do with it whatsoever. Fuck Jorm and his baseless accusations. Since I'm already banned indefinitely, I'll say whatever the hell I want now. What are they gonna do, double ban me? I have nothing left to lose. FUCK JORM. Alex Devens (talk) 16:27, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Double ban"? No. Pull TPA? Yes. If you ever feel like returning as a productive member of Wikipedia, you'll need to request an unblock via UTRS. Primefac (talk) 16:39, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]