User talk:My name is not dave/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7

NPP

Hi. I've just declined a CSD-A7 you placed on Wolayta sodo Agricultural College: Educational institutions cannot be Speedy Deleted A7. If you still feel he article should be deleted please use a valid criterion. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:34, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. That's new to me. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 18:27, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
See: Template:Db-a7. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:38, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Jorma Taccone

My source for the recent change to Jorma Taccone's page is the person whose page I was editing. Not sure how to cite that appropriately. I'll also be changing his photo and possibly other items.Havilah123 (talk) 18:14, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

The trouble is, you can't really cite 'Jorma Taccone said that'. It might seem a little patronising, to think that the subject of the article cannot be referenced as a source, but we need some sort of accessible and hard evidence (a book, a webpage about him or something like that). Check out the Wikipedia page on reliable sources; to quote from WP:PUBLISH, Sources that are not published (e.g., something someone said to you personally) or not accessible (e.g., the only remaining copy of the book is locked in a vault, with no one allowed to read it) are never acceptable as sources on Wikipedia. The photo needs to be licensed under a free licence, which by default is dual-licensed with GFDL and a Creative Commons licence (you can just choose one if you wish).
A very important question as well -- are you of some association to Mr. Taccone, and if so, have you recieved payment to carry out any of these edits? Thanks, My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 18:21, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

ILBM

Excuse me, but why did you remove my tool's link from the ILBM articles' utilities? What's the difference between my tool and the others?

Because you added an external link, of which XLinkBot removed. XLinkBot, is well, an automated bot (program), which removes links that are listed on her list of references to remove. You reverted that change without any reason in the edit summary box, which led me to think that it was a 'bad faith' revert. Indeed, you are right, this link is not really problematic, but WP:EL does note that external links should not go in the body of the article. Standard protocol is to put them in an 'external links' section at the bottom of the article. I will go do that, and see if any other human editor 'swoops by' and removes it. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 18:47, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Pat Weisner

Incorrect information added to this name should be deleted. Jeandebougett (talk) 08:45, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

It's not incorrect at all. The infomation has a citation, which restates exactly what it is stating. Thank you for finally explaining your edits, however. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 08:48, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
There was some malicious stories added under the coaching section which I deleted. I also noticed the story about the car being abandoned which is not the true story. It should be taken out as Pat did not abandon the car even though a newspaper alleged he did. If it must remain it should say 'it is alleged he abandoned a car' at best. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeandebougett (talk • contribs)
Well that's precisely the point. Since there never is a 'truth', we simply restate what is said in published and reliable sources. Now I must admit, local newspapers in the UK can be pretty shabby on the facts, my local one is just a disaster. I would go with putting something like 'In 2010 the Manchester Evening News reported [...]'.
In addition, please make sure you sign every talk page post with four tildes (~~~~) at the end of it, and correctly indent your messages, which involves placing one more colon on the front of your message than the preceding message. Thanks, My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 08:58, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
Can you just lock the page so that people like wizbangboom55 can not make further defamatory comments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeandebougett (talk • contribs)
I can't, as I'm not an admin, but page has been protected by CambridgeBayWeather, who is an admin. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 09:06, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

indian team

Lmao tf is wrong with you? I believe is a phrase. I was 99% sure about the edit in concern. That information isn't always available. Hence i used the word believe. As it turns out, my edit was correct. So maybe use your brain next time? AdiRams12 (talk) 08:35, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

@AdiRams12: If the information is not available then it is not included. Lists are difficult, and I don't know whether that is true or not, maybe you can find a published source to suggest that is no longer playing in the national team, and post it here (due to pending changes being enabled on that page I need to confirm those edits). Also I hope your aware of our policies regarding the acceptable usage of language on this site. I suppose the general rule is, would you say the same things to my face? My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 11:21, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
@AdiRams12: Actually, your edit was wrong and has been reverted by me. Next time please double-check with reliable sources like Cricinfo even if you are 99% sure about something. You should also try to be more WP:CIVIL while addressing another user. Dee03 17:05, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Phase The Wait (Album)

Apparently I was editing while you reverted the edit so when I finished your reversion was undone... I was adding the references there at the time. I am improving the article, it just takes time, I am not a full time Wikipedia editor, A girl's gotta eat! hehe! All the best! Asouko (talk) 05:45, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Alright, no worries. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 07:32, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Encyclopedia Iranica

Read the Iranica text please. Don't fall for the POV pushers tactics. "Alexander historians give Ariobarzanes a large army (40,000 infantry and 700 cavalry in Arrian, Anabasis 3.18.2; 25,000 infantry in Curtius 5.3.17 and Diodorus 17.68.1; the latter adds 300 horsemen), and their modern successors follow them unreservedly (e.g., Th. Doge, Alexander, Boston and New York, 1890, p. 401; J. F. C. Fuller, The Generalship of Alexander the Great, London, 1958, pp. 228ff.; N. G. L. Hammond, *Alexander the Great: King, Commander and Statesman, London, 1981, p. 185)."Simanos (talk) 07:55, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

RfA

Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:52, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
No worries, it was an obvious win. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 16:52, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Page mover granted

Hello, My name is not dave. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, and move subpages when moving the parent page(s).

Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! Alex ShihTalk 17:32, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Cheers. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 17:33, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

[[


File:Barnstar of Reversion Hires.png|100px]]


The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Keep up the excellent anti-vandalism work! --George AKA Caliburn · (Talk · Contribs · CentralAuth · Log) 18:09, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Cheers. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 18:09, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for catching my error in the Autoimmune disease in women article. It was a cut and paste from a NIH website (in the public domain) and needed to be reworded to be appropriate, as you pointed out. Thanks again.

Best Regards,
Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 21:55, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
No worries. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 21:56, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer granted

Hello My name is not dave. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

  • URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
  • Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
  • Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Alex ShihTalk 00:15, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

YUL

I am indeed ingage in an edit war. What I'd like to know though is why are you thinking that I am wrong in this case? Why does I am pointed to be engaged? Why don't you told Garretka to stop editing back MY edit? WoWowYUL (talk) 12:06, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Well, as I stated, nobody owns pages. The reason you are, "wrong", is that you haven't provided a very good explanation of why you think your edits are justified. We're all bound to the same old beautiful policies and guidelines, and there ought to be a better exception to the rule than what you think you should happen with "your" edits on "your" article. I don't think you'd be using that terminology with such emphasis if you thought positively of those edits. Yes, maybe I should have warned Garretka, but I'm not just going to token warn him now, that would be inappropriate. Be careful though, you are already on 3RR, Garretka is on 2RR. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 12:15, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Outing

Yeah I'm not sure if Outing applies specifically in this case, but I've reverted my edit and took your response with it (since it references my edit.) It's uncertain, but you're right to err on the side of caution. Hope you're okay with me removing your comment. Canterbury Tail talk 12:45, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, definitely. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 12:45, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Robert Hecht (health policy)

Hi- I see that you edited the page that I created currently titled "Robert Hecht (health policy)". Would it be possible/would you mind renaming the page "Robert M. Hecht"? I'm new to Wikipedia editing and I don't think I have the credentials to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allisonj1224 (talk • contribs)

Done. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 07:21, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Request on 16:22:48, 1 August 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Bchilds


Hi, you recently rejected my submission of Howard Sachs as a notable person because I did not sufficiently establish notability. I was wondering if you saw the reference from the National Institute of Mental Health entry on the History of Oxytocin that referred to Sach's research. Is this the sort of thing that establishes notability, or are you looking for something else? Should I increase the number of references of this sort? I would be grateful for guidance because I would like to resubmit the article. Bchilds (talk) 16:22, 1 August 2017 (UTC)Bchilds Bchilds (talk) 16:22, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

I was just trying to measure this against the the professor test. When I looked on Google Scholar to see how Sachs' papers were cited, it was around 259 citations. Now, looking at this again, I am inclined to accept it. But please, fix those section headers. You'll note that no featured article Has Section Headers That Look Like This -- we have a Manual of Style here. Thanks, My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 08:31, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. I fixed the style of the headings and resubmitted. Bchilds (talk) 01:16, 4 August 2017 (UTC)Bchilds

I am not being compensated for my edits

Every change I made was written objectively, and I am reporting out on public record and information that is extremely relevent to visitors of the Asbury page. Please revert my changes, or allow me to do so myself.

Thanks.

Thank you for your reply. Please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~), so we know who is posting. Have reverted at your request. Thanks, My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 19:17, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks!

No conflict of interest

As I told you, I am not being paid for these edits. There is no conflict of interest. All of the content I provided is factual and objective.

Thanks.

@Charlieagrinsoni: This is not about the content of the edits, but your relation to the company, regardless of renumeration for this or not. Could you confirm that? Could you confirm that you have no relation to Asbury Automotive Group? Nonetheless, what you have posted as the company's history has a large chunk uncited, and is a copyright violation (this is the report). My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 20:03, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
I do have relation to the company, but I am not being compensated for my edits. I have updated my edits to contain more citations where necessary. What do I have to do to make these edits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlieagrinsoni (talk • contribs)
@Charlieagrinsoni: See the notice I posted on your talk page. Do not edit the article directly; suggest edits on the talk page with the {{Template:request edit}} template. Add a notice on your user page (User:Charlieagrinsoni) with a conflict of interest declaration, stating something like "I, Charliearginsoni, work for Asbury Automotive Group as an XXXXX. I hereby agree that I will not make edits directly to the page in question, and will use the article's talk page to suggest the edits instead." I will also add a note to the talk page that you have edited this page as a conflict of interest editor. The content is the not what we mean by conflict of interest, but your relations to any organisations, family members, your employer etc. etc. Thanks, My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 14:50, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
And also, to repeat what I said above, please sign all messages you write on the talk page with four tildes (~~~~). Also make sure to correctly indent messages. You will note that my messages, when you see them while editing, have colons before what is written (I have also fixed your last message for you so it has that as well). This is the way to indent a message; you must place one more colon before the last message. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 14:53, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Matt Zuccaro

Hello apparently people are concerned about the page "Matt Zuccaro" being a copyright infringment. I changed it and it should be OK now. I do not believe the Helicopter association is concerned with their page being paste on wikipedia but if they are I am happy to comply. The page is fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakenicholson (talk • contribs)

@Jakenicholson: It's me who found out that it was a copyvio. And it's not them, it's us. We take copyright violations of any sort very seriously. Don't think that copying and pasting stuff from other sites is okay, it's not. Please do not do it. In addition, always create a new section for a new topic on a talk page, sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) and when you reply to this message, place one more colon before than mine to properly indent the message. Thank you. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 10:24, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Upper Hudson American Viticultural Area.

Dear My name is not dave,

I've made the changes that you suggested. The <ref> have been moved to the ends and the headings changed from ===xxx=== to ==xxx==. I am very new at this and don't know all the rules. Let me know if I need to change anything else.

Also, sorry about not putting something in the comment section when I re-submitted the article, again it's me being green.


ANdy

  • Caption1
    Caption1
  • Caption2
    Caption2

Review of Draft:Erich Reimer

I was asked on the IRC help channel about your review of Draft:Erich Reimer. I have two comments:

  1. I do not think it is appropriate to decline an otherwise acceptable draft because there's one capital letter where there should be a lowercase letter. Fixing that issue would have cost you less effort than commenting on it. No article will ever be deleted because of use of title caase; the purpose of AfC is not to make good articles but to keep out the stuff that would otherwise need to be removed.
  2. The draft is heavily based on primary sources (Reimer's commentary or the websites of organizations and publications he's affiliated with). Reliable third-party sources are few and far between and mostly do not discuss Reimer in much detail (the best I found covered his student council campaign, though I didn't check all). An entire section was based solely on primary sources. That is a problem that may lead to declining the draft, on grounds of verifiability and, arguably, notability. Huon (talk) 17:03, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
@Huon: I decline things like this because I think that users should learn MoS stuff, well, just general convention of how an article is formatted. If I subtlety just changed that I don't think they would benefit knowledge of stuff like that. AfC articles are full of articles not abiding to MOS:HEAD, and have always been. A few days ago I actually made that section of the MOS more clear, placing emphasis on section headers Being like this And Not Like This. It is so common. I also emphasised this in the last page of the Article Wizard, and before in fact. You know, the first thing that I notice as a reader, and I think even someone without knowledge of how things are here, would be formatting. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 17:11, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
You could accept the draft, clean it up, and then leave a message for the author explaining what you did and why. You could even accept it and leave a message for the author to please clean it up. If the same article, created without going through AfC, would not be deleted, the draft should not be declined. Otherwise we're setting the bar at AfC so high that we're effectively telling people to not bother with that process at all because creating live articles directly is more likely to work. Huon (talk) 17:43, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
@Huon: Well, you know what, I never thought of doing that. Good idea, thanks! My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 17:58, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Tagging of Enthira kaalai

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Enthira kaalai. I do not think that Enthira kaalai fits any of the speedy deletion criteria  because This actually does exist, and is now cited to a reliable source. It may not be notable, but it was not "made up". I request that you consider not re-tagging Enthira kaalai for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 04:16, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Request on 15:11:56, 9 August 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Danlipka


(I'm not exactly sure how this works, so I apologize for anything in advance) I had asked a volunteer to help create a wikipedia page for the Making Headway Foundation (a non-profit that helps kids with brain cancer). They put something substantial up there, but I guess there were problems with it and it was removed (or put back into draft form. The volunteer asked that I contact Wikipedia user DESiegel for help, which I did. He helped reformat the information and removed a lot of it, leaving behind the core information and the news sources for each bit. Based on this, I resubmitted the draft. However, you denied it because there were no changes (but there were a lot of changes since it was first submitted (mostly removing anything remotely promotional)). I'm not sure how to proceed and any specific guidance would be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much. Daniel Lipka (talk) 15:11, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Daniel Lipka (talk) 15:11, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

@DESiegel: Can you confirm this? I can't see your name in the page history of the draft. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 17:37, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Just checking in to see if DESiegel responded. Here is the link to our correspondence (if that helps) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DESiegel#Help_Republishing_Page. I think he is listed as a connected contributor. Thank you. Daniel Lipka (talk) 14:53, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

In the hope of helping to clarify the situation, User:ExploreWiki was hired through Upwork to create the Making Headway Foundation article, and subsequently did so. The article was moved to draft space when ExploreWiki was blocked, as the article lacked sufficient sources to warrant being in mainspace. Since then, My name is not dave is correct in that no edits have been made to the article, and no new sources have been added to address the problem raised when it was moved to be a draft. I'm a bit uncomfortable with describing an editor hired by the organisation as a "volunteer", as that seems misleading, but the core problem is that nothing has been done to address the issues with the article. - Bilby (talk) 15:12, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the update and I understand your concern. As a complete novice to Wikipedia, I tried to do this myself (and list as a connected person), but I couldn't figure out the formatting. I saw that I could hire somebody to help me with the formatting for a nominal cost; however, that person was very misleading and didn't explain the issues that I am now facing. Originally, I had provided significantly more information for possible inclusion on the page (all with sources from credible media). After I learned that there was going to be a problem, I asked a volunteer to help rewrite the page so that it might be approved. I also was referred to DESiegel for assistance. After that, the page was edited down to what it is now (which is very brief, completely supported by credible sources, and does not include any promotional information). The draft was rejected because no changes were made, but there had been a lot of changes (I can send a document with what was originally up there). I just looked at the draft and I did find one error on the citation, in which a book didn't have the title (our organization was highlighted in Bill Clinton's book). So I just added the title and the pages numbers (maybe that is what needed to be changed in the first place). In the end, I apologize that I didn't go about this the right way. The Making Headway Foundation has been helping children with brain tumors for over 20 years and are one of the largest organization that focuses on this issue. I'm not sure if this merits a Wikipedia page or not. If you think that it might, can you please help. I significantly appreciate your expertise and what you do to help keep Wikipedia credible. I defer to your judgement and am happy to help in any way possible. Thank you for your understanding Daniel Lipka (talk) 16:11, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

problem

problem
What the hell is your problem Marko012 (talk) 19:25, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Ticketer

Hi. Many thanks; I've just checked, and it has been done already by the editor at DYK who has promoted the nomination to the holding area. Unless anything changes, the hook should be appearing on the Main Page for 24 hours from early on 24th August (you'll receive an automatic talk page notification as soon as that happens). Cheers, Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 10:52, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Alright, excellent. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 16:37, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Ticketer

On 24 August 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ticketer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the introduction of Ticketer ticket machines on Reading Transport buses meant that 11,000 pre-paid cards had to be reissued? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ticketer. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ticketer), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex ShihTalk 00:02, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello My name is not dave, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 16,991 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.

Technology update:

  • Rentier has created a NPP browser in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.

General project update:

  • The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the autoconfirmed article creation trial. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features.
  • Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not tagbombing are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which can be added to your toolbar for ease of use with this user script.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Criticism of the Work Capability Assessment for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Criticism of the Work Capability Assessment 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/Criticism of the Work Capability Assessment 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. DGG ( talk ) 03:36, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Life of Boris for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Life of Boris 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/Life of Boris 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. Zhangj1079 (T|C) 14:19, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Reddy dynasty

Mallampalli Somasekhara Sharma is a notable historian who clearly said Reddies of kondaveedu are vassals to Musunuri Nayaks. Musunuri Nayaks ruled entire Andhra Pradesh and Telangana so definitely kondaveedu reddies they r vassals. How come a dynasty rule independently under same rule of Musunuri Nayaks????? U might be from Reddy community but u need to check whether sources are provided or not. Wikipedia must not be fake Weckkrum (talk) 17:04, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

@Weckkrum: I have not a single clue on this subject. I am just a recent changes patroller, who noticed you edit warring. I am a white male from the south of England...so no...I have no vested interests in this. Nonetheless you have made 4 reverts to one page in a day, which will probably get you blocked. I have told you that WP:BRD is the general way things work, but one has gone on the offence. Oh well. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 17:11, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
I have reverted 4 times because one editor named Foodie 377 is repeatedly vandalising the Reddy dynasty wikipedia page though sources are provided. He reverted more times than me check once Weckkrum (talk) 17:16, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
No, those edits are not vandalism. Thus not justified. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 17:19, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Glass harmonica

Hi Not Dave....my name is David Mauldin. I am a current player/performer of the glass armonica. Can I be added to the glass armonica page?

Only folks with articles can I'm afraid. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 19:18, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

AN3 notice

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Honved2018 reported by User:Jim1138 (Result: ). Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 07:29, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Evidence

Hello! A user by the name of Jim1138 has been nagging me and vandalizing my edits. He has asked me to provide proof of your verification and thanks from the other day as proof that the edit is suitable; may I please be granted such assistance?

Thanks mate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Honved2018 (talk • contribs)

Hello, can you please elaborate further in regards to this:
"I thanked you for your edit because you used the edit summary to explain why you were deleting it. Now, that does not mean that I raised suspicion at your edits. They seemed a little POV-like, but because I do not know anything about the topic, I left it for someone else to judge. Clearly my initial suspicion was right."
I'm a bit confused also, because you said you held suspicion yet didn't.
Thanks mate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Honved2018 (talk • contribs)
Nag time - there is a huge notice on top of the edit box, which tells you what you must do on my talk page or any talk page. So sign your edits please. Also indent your messages, which is something not mentioned. I fixed the indenting for you, note how the next message gets an extra colon at the start of it in edit mode.
Nonetheless, I thought my message was quite clear. I don't support your edits, never did, but I only left them because I'm not an expert in Romanian history, I'm just a boring old recent changes patroller. Your edits seemed controversial to me, and I would have reverted again if I would have known better. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 09:40, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

send

pls ryan 13:29, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

September 2017

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Hungary. 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 read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:57, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
I can't see any way that doing five reverts in about fifteen minutes (and using Huggle on something that another admin had already called as a content dispute and hence not a clear and obvious exemption of the three revert rule exemption) is not straightforward edit warring. You may wish to read the three revert rule policy page. Sure, this is inappropriate (indeed, it earned an instant block), but if you had another editor continually revert your attempts to improve the encyclopedia, you'd probably snap too. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:14, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
@Ritchie333: Until the genuine mistake of reverting what started to become sourced (thought not all), additions of unsourced content are things I wouldn't call 'improvements'. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 14:21, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Happens to me all the time. I realise users turning up and adding unsourced content on a potential GA is infuriating, but as long as we have WP:3RR, you can't violate it to get your own way. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:23, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

My name is not dave (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm not sure whether this block is preventative of anything as of such. I was reverting unsourced information, until I made a genuine mistake, as the editor actually started to provide sources to what they were writing. I'm not sure why, then, I wasn't blocked for 3RR yesterday. Today I made a mistake with one edit. At the end of the day, I totally did not expect this. My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 14:04, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Mistakes happen; nobody is perfect and we all slip once in awhile. I know you well enough to trust that you'll take a moment and brush through Wikipedia's edit warring and 3RR policies and that you won't cause any more problems. I'm going to accept your unblock request pending your response promising that you'll thumb through those policy pages. I'll also give Ritchie333 some time to respond with any objections to my decision (should he have any). Cheers -- ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:20, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

No objections to an unblock; I subscribe to the general concepts that adminship is "not a big deal" and that other admins should be allowed to undo actions they disagree with or where the circumstances change. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:36, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:My_name_is_not_dave/Archive_5&oldid=1144236415"