User talk:EvergreenFir/Archive 19

Archive 15

←

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

→

Archive 23

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2021 Boulder shooting on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:30, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Edit about Covid

How was my edit disrupve. I was just merely giving him some advice. Just because you disagree with me doesnt mean that i was being disruptive. We should be able to voice our opinions on Wikipedia. Have a nice day, Cboi Sandlin (talk) 18:37, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

@Cboi Sandlin: Wikipedia is not a social media platform for you to espouse your conspiracy theories to newcomers or disruptive articles (e.g., [1]). Nor is it a place to push religious points of view, disparage other religions, or proselytize ([2], [3]). EvergreenFir (talk) 18:40, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir: First of all, beleiving that the COVID "Pandemic" was exagerated by a very untrustworthy corrupt media is not a conspiracy theory, it is a very logical conclusion. Secondly, I when i was talking about religion, it was because i saw vandalism (like somebody putting Judaism as a mental disorder), and i thought that while i was at it i would tell them about Jesus, because, as i am sure you know, us Christians like to tell people about Jesus' love for them. Still, i apologize if i caused anyone offense, and i will try to be more careful in the future. Have a great day, Cboi Sandlin (talk) 18:54, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Block and revdel request

Hello, I hate to do an end-around of AIV but I was hoping you could block 24.96.111.106 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). This person has been actively vandalizing in the half hour since I reported at WP:AIV. Also their contribution history will probably need some revdels at least for the edit summaries if not the edits themselves, especially [4] [5] [6]. Thanks, —KuyaBriBri^Talk 04:16, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

I have to go off wiki now but I see you are working on this. Thanks very much. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 04:28, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

@KuyaBriBri: big thanks for alerting me to the problems. Definitely appropriate to bypass AIV in these cases. I think I REVDELed all the most egregious edits. I semi-protected Precilla Chan and the Starshot pages because the IP user indicated they were using a public wifi. Hopefully they'll stop for now. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:33, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Correcting ping for Kuyabribri EvergreenFir (talk) 04:34, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

blm sections

There are dead links on the section, some are outdated — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.17.149.254 (talk) 06:26, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Account creation concern

Greetings, I am an assistant professor from Toronto working with the WikiEd student program. I am receiving emails from a variety of students saying account creation blocks are in place due to vandalism. The variety of requests I've received suggests this limitation is set on a wide variety of IP addresses associated with students working at home. Most, if not all of these students have likely never edited Wikipedia before. My own Wikipedia account also receives the same notice, so I cannot help them at this time, even with this WikiEd link https://dashboard.wikiedu.org/faq/12/. Can you explain why this is occurring? Can you please address this? Thank you. Best, --Jaobar (talk) 15:15, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

I should clarify that the account User:EvergreenFir is associated with these limitations. Best, --Jaobar (talk) 15:18, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@Jaobar: Hello Jaobar! Thank you for reaching out. Do you know which IP range needs to be reviewed? Or when I instituted the block in question? What I'll likely need to do is remove the "block account creation" from the block settings. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

IP Address user pushing Jews as Middle Eastern Americans

Hi, I noticed that you reverted User:2601:84:4500:c550:fdac:bc94:dc8d:32dc's edit that "There are loads of sources verifying that Jews are an ethnic group of Levantine origin. There's a reason Europe is called diaspora..." On the Middle Eastern Americans page this user also tried to push a similar argument without sources and now another IP user is doing the same thing. Any advice on how to deal with this? I've reverted and asked for sources before inclusion several times. Thanks.Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 13:44, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Malassezia on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

sources

some articles have dead links — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.124.235.124 (talk) 04:10, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

RevDel request

Hello, sorry to bother you. Is it possible to remove Special:Diff/1015727172 and Special:Diff/1015726826? --Ashleyyoursmile! 05:46, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Done! EvergreenFir (talk) 05:54, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much. :) Ashleyyoursmile! 05:55, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Stable version to revert to on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:31, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Ordinarily, I would not make an ordeal out of this but you stated your document/press release was suitable for wikipedias purposes and mine was the autopsy report which carries the connotation that your document is "best." Let the arguments stand as they are. Don't use your admin power to limit the scope of discussion. CanadianUSLawCQEJLRMMO(talk) 06:05, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Not declaring certain documents best

I declared a certain autopsy the only legit one. Meaning legitimate. This is not an opinion. It's a fact, stemming from the fact that Andrew Baker is the official medical examiner for the county where this death occured, and did rightly receive the body first, intact and fresh. In my personal opinion, yes, the best document regarding cause of death is a report of a legit autopsy. But I didn't say that earlier, you jumped to your own (mostly correct) conclusion. Not complaining or snipe hunting, just clarifying. Keep up the good work! InedibleHulk (talk) 11:11, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:30, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Phineas and Ferb

What's wrong with the source? This man's articles appear in respected newspapers.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:28, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

It appears to be self-published. A better source would be some source from the producers/creators or some press release. If we use the source you gave, we'd at minimum have to attribute the guess. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

I've been reading these articles for years. I could link to uses of the articles from the web site in various newspapers. I suppose you're right that the author's speculation is just that, but his articles have appeared in respectable newspapers for as long as I can remember.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:34, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Seems borderline to me, but a newspaper as the source would be a step up from that Q&A. I'd be okay with that personally. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:38, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

The problem is I have found no newspaper that uses the article for which it is possible to link so you can see that it was used in a newspaper. I can link using my library card. You probably cannot link to this particular newspaper.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:52, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

See if you like it now. I don't know how to make the red lock appear.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:03, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

User Tevin21

I want to bring this to your attention that The random IP that keeps saying 2020 was the final is User:Tevin21. They previously made these exact same edits from another IP that was blocked. Then they made an account (Tevin21) that was also blocked. Now they're back on another IP (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:2600:8800:401A:4700:C4E5:AD28:73EE:5B16) I believe that this ip is being used for vandalism and It is the same person. Chip3004 (talk) 15:44, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Please Take look of these ip addresses - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2600:8800:401A:4700:D1FB:F48D:7DB8:FA51, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2600:8800:401A:4700:9821:DC59:B8FC:811B and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2600:8800:401A:4700:C4E5:AD28:73EE:5B16 and it is the same person that created User:Tevin21 and since those three ip address belong to Cox Communications Inc. Chip3004 (talk) 23:13, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Chip3004: thanks for letting me know. Ive semi protecteda bunch of articles and blocks the /64 range for a few days. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:George Floyd protests in Minneapolis–Saint Paul on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

A rare and precious cosmic event

	Total Solar Eclipse
	Thank you for admitting on a talk page that you were wrong. Cosmologists tell us that such happenings are only negligibly more common that total solar eclipses. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 01:40, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Now with pinging!

@Firefangledfeathers: this gave me a much needed good laugh! Thank you. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:22, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Draft talk:D.A.V. Group of Schools, Chennai on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Viggo Mortensen on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:30, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Block evading

A while ago I saw that you blocked User:Tevin21 because it was an Vandalism only account but now he is back using these ip's to Vandalize wikipedia and here is the ip addresses he is using to Vandalize wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:2600:8800:401A:4700:9821:DC59:B8FC:811B, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2600:8800:401A:4700:D1FB:F48D:7DB8:FA51, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2600:8800:401A:4700:C4E5:AD28:73EE:5B16 and frankly all i had an enough of these ip's and needs to be blocked asap! I don't think these ip's won't stop Vandalizing Wikipedia either. Chip3004 (talk) 04:06, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Agreed. Whoever was behind that account and these IPs literally won't stop. They have been performing the exact same edits for months on end now. I tried to communicate with them on the User:Tevin21 account. Read through the first "January 2021" section on the talk page. They are 100% convinced they are right based off of some hearsay but could never provide a reliable source. We now have 100% confirmation about a Backlash event happening this year, but this editor is still absolutely adamant that it is not happening and believes that another event that WWE does not even own the rights to anymore will instead happen. --JDC808 ♫ 06:13, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Whimsy is dead, flavour is done

I just saw a Metallica song come to life. Cops now have reasonable fear of restraining drugged criminals from endangering themselves and others using traditonal non-deadly force. The medical examiner's opinion has effectively been declared null and void in cases social media darlings and global corporations want to prosecute under Congressional threat of riot. Can bear spray cause a stroke? Can dissent be a hate crime? Does the presumption of innocence really apply to the dead, maybe moreso than actual sentient humans? Black lives matter, yes, no fucking question! But that's irrelevant, a smokescreen, an offensive crutch. Justice is done, and it is reasonably interpreted as "so grim, so true, so real". So excuse me if I was being sarcastic with that "thank you" for edit conflicting me earlier. My real life is giving me very dumb shit to dig through, too, along with Jim Steinman dying to boot, so yeah...call me a bit "edgy", "testy" or whatever, you're still cool in my books (no sarcasm now)! And yeah, seriously, I'm on a good-natured humour strike till this all blows over, starting this minute. Cheers to sobriety? InedibleHulk (talk) 02:36, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@InedibleHulk: Things are a clusterfuck in this world, I agree. My comment was more trying to defuse and prevent any NOTFORFUM type discussions. Sorry if I offended or just ticked you off. You are still cool in my book too. I hope the stuff in real life eases up for you. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:05, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Merely ticked off, no worries. It's one thing to lose a slowly-inputted and thoughtful explanation to just any old interjection, but one explicitly refuting the very intended meaning itself..."Ouch", as they say. You didn't know, though, just dumb luck/cruel fate/chaotic neutrality. "Funnily enough", in that regard, one of my personal complaints is now "I can't breathe". Part of me knows I can, so relax, but part feels extra bad for anyone held down on a sidewalk after a scuffle in this condition. Rest in peace, Mr. Floyd, wherever you are; defending the police was never about attacking you to me, if you're coincidentally somehow reading this. Evergreen, thank you truly for "NOTFORFUM", I know exactly what you mean! InedibleHulk (talk) 05:12, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Unblock Request

@EvergreenFir: Thank you so much! I am very grateful for the second chance, and I will not disappoint you. NonhumanAnimalAutonomy (talk) 18:20, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I understand you unblocked NonhumanAnimalAutonomy. I went through this users recent edits. He/she is too aggressive on the topic of veganism. Here this user says "Firstly, the article should be edited strictly by vegans. Non-vegan editors lack a comprehensive understanding of vegan principles." [7]. This type of comment is unacceptable. In their comment they also talk about wanting admins to be vegans.

Here the user is saying the veganism article was written by "anti-vegan lobby" groups [8]. This user is obviously fanatical about the subject. I do not believe it is good faith editing, they come across as too extreme to be editing these articles in a balanced or calm manner. I created the Veganism and Vegetarianism WikiProject so users can come together and neutrally discuss and improve articles. The idea to have only vegans editing articles is obviously against policy, biased and offensive. The user is currently editing-warring on the veganism article. If this doesn't stop now, I think their editing will get worse. Should this be raised at the admin board? I personally think because of the extreme nature of their edits they should topic-banned. Psychologist Guy (talk) 10:22, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

After their third removal of 15K from the Veganism article, I left them a warning about edit warring, making it clear that although passing three reverts was a bright line, it's still possible for an editor to be blocked for edit warring even if they don't cross that. I also suggested that they re-read what they'd written on their talk page whilst blocked and asking to be unblocked. Their edit summary Last revert today. Do not push the 3 revert limit isn't very hopeful, especially since it wasn't their last revert - only the last revert of that particular content. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 12:44, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

2804:D49:4905:E600::/64 resumed after block

You blocked 2804:D49:4905:E600::/64 for 31 hours on April 18. This was discussed at ANI where you contributed, archived here. Editor also edited as an IPv4 and you blocked the IPv4 alias of the IPv6 range 189.83.174.183 for 31 hours on April 24. He has resumed editing on the IPv6 range April 26 doing the same stuff as before. Looking at the info in the ANI report it looks like he uses various /64 ranges in the larger range 2804:D49:4900::/40 if you think a larger range block would be effective. I couldn't identify an IPv4 range so it looks like only that single IP was used there. This editor is getting somewhat annoying. Some good edits but still insists on not following the infobox instructions with respect to writers and directors. As I indicated in the ANI report I am unsure if he is getting the info messages we are putting on his talk pages, edit summaries, and hidden notes. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:38, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

@Geraldo Perez: I've reblocked the /64 range. All recent activity appears to be limited to that narrower range. if the disruption spreads to the /40 range, I'll expand the block. Thanks for the heads up! EvergreenFir (talk) 05:51, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Block the one range vandalizing Daffy Duck again

I caught him on it again and he won't stop, block him for 1 month for that, or a week. The range is 2604:BFC0:101:F891:0:0:0:0/64 LooneyTraceYT comment • treats 14:31, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@LooneyTraceYT: Done! And I semi-protected [{Daffy Duck]] for 3 months. EvergreenFir (talk) 16:04, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Habitus, sex, and gender

Hi, EvergreenFir,

This got long. Tl;dr: I came across a discussion about "Habitus" on de-wiki, and how it might relate to the concepts of sex and gender; they're trying to merge them. But our en-wiki articles on Habitus and Sex and gender distinction are entirely unrelated. Is that how it should be? How important or fringe is "Habitus" in anglo academia, and is it related to gender topics a lot/some/not at all?

Details: I wanted to call on your sōsh chops to raise an issue or ask some questions about "Habitus", I'm not even sure I can formulate my question very well, since habitus is a term I only just encountered. My question concerns what if any impact or connection habitus may have with sex and gender issues. Maybe I should back up, and just ask how well-known is this topic among sōsh^{(and how do you spell, that, anyway?)} folks? If it's highly tangential, maybe this whole question doesn't matter. (I'm gonna throw a lot of German terms and links at you here, but you don't need to know German for this, and it's as much for me, so I can retrace my breadcrumbs, as for you.) Basically, de-wiki seems to give "Habitus" a much larger profile in sex- and gender-related topics than we do, to the point of wanting to merge their article about it into their "Gender" article.^[translate] (The term habitus itself is a disambig page in both German and English wikipedias. The contrasting articles are de:Geschlechtshabitus^[translate] and Habitus (sociology).) So maybe my question at this point, is, "do (English-based) sociologists spend much time thinking about 'habitus' at all, and if so, do they think about it as an important subfeature of sex and gender distinction? And what, if anything, should en-wiki editors do, wrt the articles devoted to "habitus" otoh, and "sex and gender" on the other?

I came upon the term habitus and the en-wiki article Habitus (sociology), via a circuitous route: I first noticed this IP question at Talk:Sex and gender distinction. Based on IP's tone and their assertions of no difference other than a linguistic one between sex and gender and then only in English, I immediately thought to myself, "Okay, IP is definitely from Germany", (well, could be other German-speaking countries, or for that matter, other Germanic languages; IP geolocation shows them connecting from Copenhagen) because they have no native word for gender in German (they use the English loanword Gender to talk about it) or call it "social sex" (de:soziales Geschlecht ^[redirect]). German has difficulty translating the expression sex and gender. German Wikipedia tends to have less about gender, wrt sex and gender than en-wiki does, and in particular, it doesn't have an equivalent of Sex and gender distinction although many other languages do.)

Anyhow, since German doesn't have "Sex and gender distinction" as a stand-alone article, I went to their de:Gender article to see if that article might give some more background, and then I noticed a merge banner at the top of the page, linking it to Geschlechtshabitus^[translate] (roughly, "Sex-habitus", or "Gender-habitus") and Geschlechterrolle^[translate] (lit. "Sex role"). Geschlechtshabitus is a compound of Geschlecht ("sex", or "gender") and Habitus, which got me to the English article Habitus (sociology), and here we are. (German merge discussion going on here;^[translate] since 2017!)

I guess I'm asking for a brief "Habitus 101" as you see it, and what, if anything, we should do as en-wiki editors to connect the concepts, and articles on Habitus (sociology) with Sex and gender distinction. My guess is, "nothing". Currently, our Habitus article has zero occurrences of the words sex or gender on it. But it's interesting that the English translation of the Geschlechtshabitus article has gender 46 times. It's tempting to consider that a Sapir-Whorf thing, so I'm not overly concerned with that German merge, but it did make me wonder if we are missing something in our Habitus article, and just how important is that term anyway? Sorry that this is all rather disjointed and rambling, but I just came across this Habitus concept, and I'm struggling how to formulate my question, and trying to see how habitus fits, if at all, with our sex and gender articles. And did I say, how are you coping with this crazy year? Seems like there's light at the end of the tunnel, although what's going on in India is heartbreaking. Mathglot (talk) 21:17, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

• Comment - I know that I am not being asked (so feel free to ignore), but I happened to see this and it does touch on my interests, so here I go. My own sense is that the gender/habitus connection is not strong in English-language scholarship and discourse, for some of the following reasons: (1) the initial reception of Bourdieu in North America focused much more on "social capital" than on "field" or "habitus"; (2) materialist approaches to culture in the English-speaking world were preoccupied with debates that Bourdieu was not an easy resource to use to address; and/or (3) the non-linguitic and somatic terrain that people like Lefebvre and Bourdieu mapped was not really taken up in English-speaking scholarship, and was later appropriated by feminists emerging from quite different theoretical frames (like Butler or Haraway), with the result that "performativity" and "embodied knowledges" become key terms rather than "habitus". Newimpartial (talk) 21:33, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

68.132.99.144

Hi.

You were the last admin to block the above IP, so I thought you might take a look at its current editing on Political views od Adolf Hitler, in particular their edit summaries, in which they claim to have tried to talk with me and I was "unresponsive". In point of fact, this IP has never posted on my talk page, and has refused to open a discussion on the article talk page. Their edits have been reverted by myself and Kierzek, so as of this moment there's a working consensus against including their material.

After looking at the IP's talk page, with almost constant warnings from soon after they started editing in October 2020 (none of them replied to), and three blocks in those 8 months, it seems apparent that the IP is NOTHERE, and that an indef block should be considered. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:34, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Ronald Reagan on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:30, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Deletion review on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:32, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Windsor, Virginia on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Grab (company) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:31, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Republican Party (United States) on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

KSF

Could you keep an eye out for unsourced edits altering the number of Kosovo Security Force military vehicles? [9] [10] We've covered similar territory before with Albanian Armed Forces and List of equipment of the Albanian Armed Forces. Thanks. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:37, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Star Wars was filmed all over the world but it was made by an American studio, so there before it's an American film, where something is filmed is irrelevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Undid (talk • contribs) 17:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

TPA

Hi EvergreenFir. I don't know how common it is to revoke talk page access for an IP user, but at the talk page of 70.249.170.51, they have inserted dozens of page protection templates. Since you were the one who blocked them in the first place, I thought it would make sense to alert you first. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 06:09, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

I second this, they just made around 20-30 edit requests to Wikipedia:Vandalism (real subtle) on their talk page. Edit: nevermind, it has been dealt with now. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 08:52, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

2804:D49:4905:E600::/64 still a problem

See previous here. Resumed after block, last at User talk:2804:D49:4905:E600:4D8C:3DC:EDA2:EF6F. Good edits mixed in with stuff that goes against guidelines and template instructions as before. Ignores messages on talk page. I've been watching since the last block expired and seems have improved a bit but I still think isn't really catching on as to how to contribute correctly. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:31, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

To add - he's also edited a bit in the range Special:Contributions/2804:D49:491E:6300::/64 doing similar stuff. The common larger range is 2804:D49:4900::/40 if you think a block is indicated to include that. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:53, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@Geraldo Perez: Done! Thanks for reporting and pointing out that /40 range. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:16, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Block Evasion of User:Tevin21

Back in April I recalled that you blocked /64 range for block evasion of User:Tevin21, well he is back using multiple ip's to vandalize Wikipedia Articles Mainly Bash at the Beach (2000) and The Horror Show at Extreme Rules which are now page protected. Here is the ip's that the same person that created User:Tevin21 is using to vandalize Wikipedia and clearly it is a block evasion of User:Tevin21

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2600:8800:4003:ED00:A0B5:E7B4:B52D:4AB9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2600:8800:4003:ED00:7D4B:9E3A:F839:4433 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2600:8800:4003:ED00:28A0:4187:496D:9AD0 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2600:8800:4003:ED00:6923:9C3B:C69D:392B

Chip3004 (talk) 14:38, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Done! EvergreenFir (talk) 23:15, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-Protection request

Please Semi-protect Screen Gems, because the vandalism won't stop, and it would cause a Big edit war, instead of an expiration time of 1 month, semi-protect the page for 1 year. Thank you. LooneyTraceYT comment • treats 14:16, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Done EvergreenFir (talk) 23:16, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Persistent vandalism by IPs

Would you consider adding some sort of page protection to the Killing of Philando Castile article? At least 5 IPs in addition to the new account you recently banned have been vandalizing the article today, as well as using personal attacks in some of their edit summaries. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 04:50, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

They also created this new account: Baconbeat321. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 04:51, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

@Wallyfromdilbert: all done! thanks for the heads up. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:11, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! Good catch with that last revert, too. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 06:11, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Le Sage's theory of gravitation on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:30, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Iymen Chehade on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Second Cold War on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:31, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

SNL Season 2 Episode 17 Musical Performances

Hi I recently made a change to the page Saturday Night Live (season 2) that was reverted by you for contradicting the source the article was already citing. My edit was meant to fix a error in the article that came from a error in the source the article uses for all of the musical performances. Having just watched the Santana episode, I can confirm the second musical performance was "Europa" and not "Gypsy Woman". This is also confirmed by SNL fansite SNLarchives (http://snlarchives.net/Episodes/?19770326), the description of the episode on Hulu, and the Metacritic page for the episode (https://www.metacritic.com/tv/saturday-night-live/season-2/episode-18-jack-burnssantana). I apologize I am new to editing Wikipedia so I am not clear on if any of these are appropriate sources for the article or if I can cite the episode itself, but the bottom line is that the information currently in the article is incorrect and I would greatly appreciate any help in going about fixing it. MJJMayor (talk) 21:25, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Barnstar because you deserve it!

		The Original Barnstar
		Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Signed, DinosaurTrexXX33 (talk) 13:13, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Your contribution on Talk:Circumcision

Hi EvergreenFir: I replied and made a suggestion for a possible solution. Could you have a look at it? Thanks. --Saidmann (talk) 12:14, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Riemannian geometry on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:31, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

OR at Social construction of gender

Hi EvergreenFir, you're pretty much my go-to person for anything sociology. The article Social construction of gender has been plagued by OR for a decade. I'm about to start cutting it back, starting with the plan at Talk:Social construction of gender#Original research. Any thoughts you have on the topic would be welcome. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 03:18, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	This is to thank you for your contributions to the Pansexuality & Pansexuality Pride Flag articles! Thanks! Maby51 (talk) 10:07, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Glasgow on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:32, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:State Arsenal (Providence, Rhode Island) on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:30, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Edit error

Sorry didn’t mean to change your edit Robjwev (talk) 18:47, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

3 party input to help resolve edit issues

Need neutral party input on Slavery in the United States indentured servitude section. My sourced material has been repeated undone for small details could you take a look and help resolve. Thanks Robjwev (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:57, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Bongal Kheda on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Christopher Wren on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:32, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Blackbird (land yacht) on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:31, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Independence Day

🍓⋆JennilyW♡🍧 (talk) is wishing you a Happy 4th of July! On this day, we recognize our independence from Great Britain with the adoption of the Declaration of Independence, which ultimately paved the way to our freedom. Celebrate this day in many different ways, such as hosting a barbecue, watching baseball games, or even attending a fireworks show! Happy Independence Day, fellow American!  
 

Share this message by adding {{subst:Independence Day}} to a fellow American's talk page.

🍓⋆JennilyW♡🍧 (talk) 17:35, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

i cant find anywhere

i cant find anywhere where it says the cramp twins ended in 2004 it ended in 2006 whats on there is unsourced and needs to be removed

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Oswald the Lucky Rabbit on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:30, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Marble House on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Hydropower on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:32, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Kosovo Recognition

Someone keeps changing the recognition of Kosovo from 98 to 96 when that’s completely wrong since there are so many sources saying its 98. They took Tonga off list of recognition whilst having no source and took El Salvador off the list because Kosovo is not recognised by the UN and El Salvador stated that which doesn’t mean El Salvador doesn’t recognise Kosovo. https://www.kosovodiaspora.org/el-salvador-recognized-kosovos-indpendence-now-i-did-it-five-years-ago-when-i-met-a-proud-kosovo-woman/ https://www.coha.org/latin-america-and-state-recognition-palestine-the-caucasus-kosovo-and-taiwan/ Arianasmithy74 (talk) 22:10, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2021 Cuban protests on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Andy Ngo on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:31, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:30, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion/Notability guide on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Carla Connor on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Pythagorean triple on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Byzantine Greeks on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Killing of Harambe on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:33, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:NBC News on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:31, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Tevin21

Here is something that you want to look into when you get a chance. I think the same user that you blocked inf (Tevin21) is back again and created Bevin22 to vandalize wikipedia and i think that Bevin22 is an Vandalism-only account. Chip3004 (talk) 23:21, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2600:8800:4021:7500:50BE:FFF7:1C1B:E90D

I would like to bring this to your attention that this ip has been adding false information to Halloween Havoc and as a result I had to undo this ip's edit because the ip appears to add false information to Halloween Havoc and will not stop doing that. Chip3004 (talk) 21:57, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Bruno Mars on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:YIFY on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:31, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Otokonoko

Apologies for the interruption. There's some ongoing discussions at Talk:Otokonoko which could use input from additional editors. Given your familiarity with both Japan & gender topics, I thought you might be able to provide some informed comment. - Ryk72 ^talk 01:20, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox officeholder on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:30, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Gender revert

If I provide a modern reliable source that supports the suggestion that Money's "gender role" = GI/R, would that be acceptable? Also, I don't really understand the problem, since this is just a synopsis of the history of the concept. And finally, would you mind putting back the stuff I added to the language section? You reverted over my last edit. ☹️ Tewdar (talk) 18:04, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tewdar: Sorry didn't see that I reverted over that. I'll undo. And yes, a more modern (and secondary) one would be better. Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) 18:08, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

So, basically the same *wording*, with a modern source for the G-I/R claim, and that is good with you? Also thank you for fixing, I'd probably break something if I did it...😁 Tewdar (talk) 18:12, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Oh, you put Money 1985 back! Give me a minute, I'll hunt through my books for a better source... Tewdar (talk) 18:15, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

All good? Tewdar (talk) 18:20, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:30, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Gender again

Would you mind taking a look at my recent edits today on gender and telling me if you think it is reasonable to add this information? If you're wondering why I'm asking you, rather than someone else, it's because you seem to be both reasonable and competent. Tewdar (talk) 11:08, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Silicon Valley on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:31, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Potential London NFL franchise on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:31, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Channel 5 (British TV channel) programming, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sunny Day.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Country data Afghanistan on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021

New Page Review queue September 2021

Hello EvergreenFir,

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. 04:31, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Chanhassen, Minnesota on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:32, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Rangeblock needed

I notice you've put a block on 131.226.64.8, which is appreciated, but there remains high-volume vandalism coming from the entire range of 131.226.6*.** (i.e. the range 131.226.64.0/22, see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Rangeblock_needed for more). jp×g 04:38, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Absolutely outstanding. Big thanks! jp×g 04:51, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@JPxG: my pleasure. Thanks for reporting it! EvergreenFir (talk) 04:52, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Rocko's Modern Life

I note you locked Rocko's Modern Life but the problem is not really that one article, it seems to be one person adding unnecessary unsourced genres across many articles.

They are coming from Special:Contributions/187.57.112.158/16 Special:Contributions/2804:431:C7CB:AF3E:C5E4:6C0B:D936:629A/64 and the anon editor seems particularly insistent on adding the genre "sit com" to the news satire show 31 Minutos. I hope you can do something more about the disruptive editor, locking individual articles seems unlikely to stop his behavior. -- 109.78.202.99 (talk) 15:41, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

I've warned the most recent IP address and will monitor their edits. If specific pages need protection, please use WP:RFPP. EvergreenFir (talk) 16:35, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. -- 109.78.202.99 (talk) 20:00, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

He's still at it by the way[11] -- 109.78.202.99 (talk) 01:09, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

He went right back to it after the page lock expired. See Special:Contributions/200.160.92.8 From the beginning I did not think page locks likely to change his behavior. -- 109.78.197.83 (talk) 14:38, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, unfortunately page protection is the only useful response to persistent vandals that hop ips. I'll keep playing whack-a-mole and block IPs too. If there are more, please feel free to let me know. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:25, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Duck

I see you blocked 84.64.60.145; UbinYokaimon has been making the same edits while the IP is blocked. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 18:30, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Skywatcher68:  Done EvergreenFir (talk) 19:18, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Personal apology

I would like to personally apologize for my unconstructive edit warring. It got way too unprofessional and personal between me and the other user.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 05:48, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Shiva Ayyadurai discussion

I see that you've closed discussion on the Sep 25 edit request on the Shiva Ayyadurai Talk Page. The article in question contains many significant WP:BLP violations, several of which I painstakingly documented. Then user JolleJay apparently sabotaged that discussion. Take a look at the edit comment from that user at 01:17, 29 September 2021‎, quote: "LOL NO *advance apologies for the off-topic forum-like comment" leading up to the very predictable locking of the discussion. Also take a look at the timestamps of the comment from me at 19:25, 28 September 2021 followed by the comment from JoelleJay at 01:17, 29 September 2021‎. The chronologically later comment from JoelleJay was inserted on top of the prior comment from me. As an editor of 13 years, JoelleJay really should know better. This article contains numerous WP:BLP violations, cites WP:RS Statement of opinion as fact, it cites a source that incorrectly cites a World Health Organization page that contradicts its claims...the article is full of problems, and checking its edit history, people have been pointing them out for years, but it seems to have a group of editors determined to maintain it as a hit piece.

As WP:BLP states, "This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately".

People asked for RS. I provided RS, and then documented many of the article's problems. You closed that discussion. What are your intentions? Are you going to follow up on this? 50.52.125.129 (talk) 16:44, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Bosnia and Herzegovina on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:32, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Tween

A tween is a person in his/her twenties. Because tweens are already adults, shouldn't a female tween be considered a woman? 104.172.112.209 (talk) 17:39, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Tween is another term for pre-teen, ages 10–13. Schazjmd (talk) 17:43, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Schazjmd is correct. A tween is a preteen. EvergreenFir (talk) 17:50, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Well, the Wiktionary entry for "tween" has two definitions regarding the age of a person, including the one I stated. 104.172.112.209 (talk) 17:59, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Wikitionary, like Wikipedia, is user contributed and not a reliable source. The entry was added by a globally-locked editor without any supporting evidence and should be removed. I have never seen "tween" used to denote someone in their twenties, and all reliable sources I've reviewed support its use to describe prepubescent youth.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:19, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

The "tween = twenties" gives Lord of the Rings as an example. How Tolkien used a word to describe hobbits isn't applicable to modern usage in the context of humans. Schazjmd (talk) 19:24, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

John Marshall Harlan

I will respectfully challenge you on identifying Harlan as a Christian fundamentalist. He was a Christian conservative, biblical literalist, certainly, and believed in biblical inerrancy, but my point is that the term "fundamentalist" was not even used in print when referring to Christians until 1920, after his death. The sources that call him a "fundamentalist" are wrong. If Przybyszewski uses the term "fundamentalist" in describing Harlan's religious beliefs, then I cannot find it in her biography of Harlan. If you have a citation to her use of the term in this sense then please let me know, although I would still argue that her use of it is anachronistic and erroneous. Use of the term in the other cited source, https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/robes_harlan.html, is unattributed. Also that brief, and now inactive, web page does not identify an author. I suggest that it is a poor source in any case. Thanks. Ballinacurra Weston (talk) 04:41, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:31, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of soft-skinned vehicles of the United States Armed Forces on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:30, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. (t · c) buidhe 01:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Charlottesville chant

I saw that you reverted my edit just eight minutes after I'd made it. I had made the edit because I had watched and heard the rioters' video of the torch-lit march past the synagogue and starting on the evening before the next day's homicide. I didn't even realize that besides the "Jews shall not replace us," chant that I'd heard, as the rioters marched past the synagogue, they had also used the alternate " You shall not replace us," on both days. The citation that I'd left and which you removed was from the Washington Post which incorporated the "Jews" chant as part of its headline that day. The Charlottesville riot trial, which started just yesterday, was again referred to in the first sentence of yesterday's Post article, once more, as "Jews shall not replace us." Spencer himself is best known for his anti-Semitism. I Googled the "Jews" term and got 70 million hits. One of the top hits was a seminar at the Union Theological Seminary with the included term both appearing in the label of an embedded video, with that chant, at 6 minutes into the video superimposed for the next two minutes. So it's thoroughly cited, notable and both historic and current. If you disagree, I would suggest that you take it to Talk before reverting again. Activist (talk) 12:20, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Activist, the source you provided doesn't specifically support the claim that Spencer lead a chant of "Jews will not replace us". That is SYNTH. Your source says Spencer, to paraphrase, said some ugly things about Jews to the crowd. It is possible he did lead the crowd in saying "... will not replace us" but the source doesn't literally say he did so. The source also mentions other people like David Duke who also spoke to the crowd and thus could have been the person who got the crowd to say the quote in question. Alternatively, much like Red Socks fans who seem to be able to chant "Yankees suck" when playing against the Diamondbacks, it is possible this crowd chanted that on their own. Anyway, EvergreenFir was right to revert on the grounds of SYNTH. This is a BLP so this sort of synth is strictly forbidden. However, some of the statements he made to the crowd that were quoted in the article would seem reasonable if the intent is to include this source. Note, the correct place for this discussion would be the article talk page. Springee (talk) 13:11, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@Activist and Springee: I think my revert was an unintentional finger slip or something. I don't recall making that revert, sorry. That said, the source does say the chant was done, but not that Spencer led it. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:25, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

EgF, agreed, the source does say the chant happened. If my comment implied otherwise that was not intentional. Springee (talk) 18:39, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kelli Stavast on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Subhas Chandra Bose on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:31, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wales on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

When I saw this, my immediate thought was, "How do you do, fellow kids?". --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 23:18, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Remember this

Genre bloat ipv6 anon went right back at it when the locks/bans expired.[12] -- 109.76.203.218 (talk) 20:43, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits on the High Guardian Spice page and related talk page

I've been at a bit of my wits end over that page recently, but I'm doing my best to keep my cool as people keep trying to add in unreliable sources to "prove" certain points about the show, especially in the reception section, trying to reverse additions of unreliable comments, leading to comments like this. Its highly annoying and the whole "Table of reliability" seemed very unnecessary, especially with a "Potential Biases" section. Hopefully, by the end of the year, things cool down, but I'm almost confident I'll have to request protection of the page again, as the current protection expires on November 20. In any case, thanks for your contributions there.--Historyday01 (talk) 22:45, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Eritrea on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:32, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:BBC Sport on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Democracy Manifest on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:31, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Paul Gosar

Since we discussed it on Boebert's article, I was wondering what you think of this one. It states him to be far-right in the lead, but as I mentioned in the talk page of the article, only a few reliable sources occasionally call him far-right, not anywhere near the one other congressperson listed as far-right (Marjorie Taylor Greene). I do not want to remove it from the article, since two editors voiced disapproval, but since they have not responded on the talk page yet, I was wondering what you thought. Bill Williams 01:06, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Succession (TV series) on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:30, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Random IP

FYI, I asked if that IP was you here [13], because they were using your signature [14] Bogazicili (talk) 11:58, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

@Bogazicili: Oh! That's unusual and sus. It also says 2013 in the header. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:34, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Linking on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:30, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Race edits

Im having a hard time understand why the race is mentioned? It seems irrelevant and biased to add that in for a shooting or murder of someone by police. It does not matter what race the officer, nor the deceased is so why is the information placed in the first sentence? If anything it should be placed in a section related to ensuing riots/protests not front and center. Will you find an edit on a wikipedia page for the numerous Blacks killed by Black police officers? Im finding that not likely, nor the opposite Asian victim, Asian officer. If anything this furthers a divide and promots racial bias to the sunject of cases of potential police brutality and make it more or less and aggressive tone right off the bat when reading. Please discuss or revert the simple edits. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yellowboy06 (talk • contribs) 04:22, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

@Yellowboy06: Thanks for reaching out. The reason race is mentioned is because WP:DUE requires us to mention it; it's mentioned widely by reliable sources as an important aspect of the event so Wikipedia needs to reflect that. Indeed it's a central factor to why those police- involved shootings are notable enough to have their own articles. Whether we as editors think its right or not has minimal bearing on it and Wikipedia shouldn't be a venue for "fixing" social problems (see WP:RGW).

My slightly heavy-handed response is because this specific topic often becomes a WP:BATTLEGROUND and because of you're past inappropriate edits about Obama. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:47, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

November, 2021

Could someone please help. I am having disagreements with anonymous users on the projects and timelines Jeff Bergman voiced Tweety in, and I’ve doing research as carefully as I could. I tried to reason with these editors, but they seem to totally disregard my reasoning and what I have requested (please to do not revert back to "present" unless you have found another production that came or is set to come after 2018). I would like to have a protection template on the Tweety article and have it last longer. Brian K. Tyler (talk) 21:08, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Lies and Corruption on Rittenhouse Case

Why would you close the discussion when it's not done being discussed? There's nothing stopping one from also finding reliable sources showing the lies and manipulation from the media and the political left to show the truth. 142.136.62.203 (talk) 01:31, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Please review WP:RGW. Any negative claim about a living person must have a reliable source. Telling me they exist is insufficient. EvergreenFir (talk) 01:32, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

You didn't even allow for discussion, you closed it the moment you saw it. That's not how you get to the bottom of things, that's how you force a narrative. 2600:387:F:451A:0:0:0:3 (talk) 01:35, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

That's how you enforce WP:BLP and I'm a glorified janitor tasked to do that. Nothing is stopping you from getting sources. EvergreenFir (talk) 01:42, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Except this isn't a biography, it's an analysation of the lies spread by media outlets and the corruption that took place during a court case. How is that a biography of a living person anymore than the rest of the article? 2600:387:F:451A:0:0:0:3 (talk) 01:48, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

BLP applies everywhere. EvergreenFir (talk) 01:50, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

talk page

Hi EvergreenFir,

I love your name by the way. It makes me think of nice green trees. I made a note in that talk page for antifa as you suggested. No worries to me either way, I just say that that was the verbiage used across the RS cited inline on the article (and as an aside bias to be fair, I think it reads better), but regardless, is more true to the RS cited. Have a great day! And thanks for all you do. Th78blue (They/Them/Their • talk) 07:03, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Falsifiability on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kim Seon-ho on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:31, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

List of ViacomCBS television programs

Hello why did you deleted them I added them for a reason so can you reverted them back? If you do it you may have to stop deleting content just like you did at List of ViacomCBS television programs because if you do you will be blocked from editing. 148.252.128.98 (talk) 23:27, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello, can you please unblock this article List of ViacomCBS television programs? 148.252.128.98 (talk) 23:40, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Everything you added was unsourced. Please provide reliable sources for your edits. EvergreenFir (talk) 00:54, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

No he won't because what you did is disruptive. It may be unsourced, but it was his hard work so please stop your disruptive editing. If you do that again just like you did at List of ViacomCBS television programs you will be blocked from editing. 85.255.237.94 (talk) 07:45, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

That's not how this works. You can't claim the removal of unsourced dubious information is "disruptive". EvergreenFir (talk) 20:41, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Actually your edits were disruptive and had to be removed like the other time you did something. So please stop your disruptive editing. 148.252.129.26 (talk) 09:07, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing if you continue to disruptive Wikipedia like you did at List of ViacomCBS television programs. 148.252.129.26 (talk) 09:07, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

To be clear, repeated addition of uncited material can result in a block. Please stop. EvergreenFir (talk) 17:13, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Well do go on, I welcome the criticism.

The "knife fight escape" is a lie. It remains on the article. Where lie the "SO VERY HIGH STANDARDS" you talk about? Lie, I guess, just like bodies on the pavement. People put it in out of the blue, less than word of mouth of an unsourced journalist, only to provide some sense of explanation to not see with their own eyes. Who would escape through the one and only worst avenue in the town anyways.

Break your chains and step out of the cave. The editor shouldn't feel harassment, but embarassment of spousing such a stupid and improbable idea of an "escape gone wrong". Also, the guy tried to run some other person over less than a month ago.

MAYBE IT WAS ANOTHER KNIFE FIGHT ESCAPE RIGHT, I MEAN THE OOOOODDS!

How can someone be so blind. BLIND. The whole talk page is atrocious. If any one editor had written it like it was, shit would've been over by now. But no, wokepedia needs to reassure their snowflakes that they are in the right side of history lest their mental fortitude falters when they realize that if here they were wrong, where else, too, they might be?

There is a lot of fixing to do on that article but sure, shying away correct information seems to take precedence around here.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:14d:4ca9:81c4:e87d:465b:64ff:e514 (talk)

So, instead of relying on reliable sources (the very backbone of Wikipedia), you'd rather us report your personal beliefs about what really happened because you think the official reports are wrong? I think you have us confused with OANN or something. clpo13_(talk) 21:21, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

For starters, your "reliable sources" are not that reliable. It is more of a fault of the believer, not the snakecharmer. They were doing their job, propaganda. And in that dimension they couldn't be wrong, since they were never trying for truth. Nothing changed from the facts on the ground. People claimed it was an attack yesterday with the same exact information available. Some people just broke their chains really and no longer watch the shadows dance.

4chan did the whole research. As usual, autists on that forum overwhelm in aspiepower all the alphabet agencies in your country together. You are welcome to check them yourself, if you can so briefly suspend the inclination to attack the sources and reflect (in the sanctuary of your conscience, where else) if this is the badge you brazenly wear. And no, I don't give a shit about conflict of interest; we'd both need first to pretend WP is something it's not. https://archive.md/txGp9

An encyclopedia isn't built on sourcing. It is built on truthness. Gettier truth. Strict methods (go mathematical sociology), hypothesis testing and logic are the building blocks of truth and knowledge. Where they are lacking sourcing can fill. But when lazyness enshrines the latter, we arrive at where we are: contaminated sources and peabrained zombies can't build an encyclopedia. Matter in fact they've destroyed one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:14d:4ca9:81c4:e87d:465b:64ff:e514 (talk)

> 4chan

Suddenly it all makes sense. I doubt you'll read it, but WP:TRUTH is extremely relevant here. Wikipedia's reliance on sources over "truth" is nothing new. Also, remember Reddit and the Boston Marathon? Crowdsourced research can be just as off-the-mark as the journos, especially where the terminally-online are involved. Anyways, if Wikipedia's policies and guidelines are too restrictive for you, I'm sure there are other options you'd be more comfortable with. This clearly isn't the place for you. clpo13_(talk) 22:22, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

All I have to say is oof. What a mess. IP, if you're not here to build an encyclopedia, please leave. Let me know if you need help leaving. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:30, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

There are two of you? Really confusing. It seems none could hold judgement of the source and went straight into pretending whatever it says doesn't exist. At some point you gotta rebrand yourselves from encyclopedia builders to copyists monks, minus the neat calligraphy. Or a radio repeater for media.

> WP:TRUTH is extremely relevant here

I think you mean "truth is extremely relevant here". WP:TRUTH is far from it and was tailored to allow barely educated people to do minor less cognitive intensive jobs; of course the anointed think very highly of themselves and soon all it did was transform WP in an echo chamber, curating narratives. WP:TRUTH would have burned Bruno earlier.

> Also, remember Reddit and the Boston Marathon? Crowdsourced research can be just as off-the-mark as the journos, especially where the terminally-online are involved.

So maybe they should be accepted prima facie on equal grounds and be judged on the merits of the information provided. It's not rocket surgery. The central tenet of offshoring sourcing relies on having strong independent media vehicles. Journalism is dead and is one of the most oligopolistic industries in your country. WP is doomed if it stays the course, maybe regardless. I don't know, how does the Wuhan lab leak conspiracy is going? Are you stripping all those media vehicles from the trusted list? Or comforting lies don't count? Even the 4chan Biden staffer who said he was on diapers and didn't offer any proof seems quite convincing now after the Pope ordeal (I wonder if they have a Codex on their gold inlaid bathrooms so that you can read some Roman Catholic Church:TRUTH guidelines while you're at it).

> are too restrictive for you, I'm sure there are other options you'd be more comfortable with. This clearly isn't the place for you

I thought it read "feel free to improve this article". (And I didn't even try to "improve the article" to get this boot, I went straight into the talk page. My oh my.) Must have been somewhere else. This is not the free encyc right. A group of dedicated custodes, all of which employ -coyly- methods to shove people away from their pet project of writing their passions true.

> if you're not here to build an encyclopedia, please leave

I'm not sure you are here to build an encyclopedia either if you immediately dismiss a source that might challenge your views. People die on their hearts and minds sooner than physiologically. Death in a sense is due to come with the decline in neuroplasticity; learning gets tough. But letting that childish curiosity go sooner still is such a sure way to never escape your bubble. You cannot *possibly* believe that regurgitating whatever comes out of a select list of vehicles constitute knowledge building. And to top it off with some "it's the policy, nothing I can do about it" positivism crap. I saw the badges you flash. I refuse to believe any one would describe that activity as scholastic or even intellectual. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:14D:4CA9:81C4:E87D:465B:64FF:E514 (talk) 23:23, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

November 2021

Why did you block it again? The article List of ViacomCBS television programs was recently been unblocked and why did you unlocked it again? 213.107.66.214 (talk) 06:42, 23 November 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.252.132.27 (talk)

You must put reliable sources to support your edits. I semi-protected the page because IPs (you?) have repeatedly added unsourced content. EvergreenFir (talk) 16:50, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

No it's not because we found out on IMDb it's not it has to be re-added. 148.252.132.27 (talk) 19:38, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Actually we IPs don't know how to add reliable sources and you know YouTube and IMDb sources are not reliable. I don't you're keep reverting our edits on List of ViacomCBS Television programs and you don't have the right to it. Your reverted edit is Unexplained and removing content is not acceptable so you gotta have to stop it if you do that again you will be blocked from editing. 148.252.132.27 (talk) 19:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

I know the learning curve on Wikipedia is steep, but you must provide reliable sources for your edits. It is not optional. IMDB is not a reliable sources. Neither is Youtube. I recommend that you first go do the tutorial and then read some of the how-to articles on Help:Directory. Other places you can learn about how to cite sources is WP:TEA and WP:HELPDESK.

Please stop telling me I "have to stop" and that I may be blocked from editing. You are not an admin that can block others (I am one though). EvergreenFir (talk) 19:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

By the way, who is "we IPs"? EvergreenFir (talk) 20:01, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

IPs will never ever do IPs so stop reverting things on List of ViacomCBS Televisions programs if you do you will blocked form editing! 148.252.132.27 (talk) 21:33, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Block me I don't care! 148.252.132.27 (talk) 21:33, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Racism

I am not vandalizing. “Negro killings” are real historical events that have occurred all through American history up to the 21st century. You saying that it is vandalizing is extremely racist and disrespectful to those lost to racism. The KKK, plantation owners, and policemen all are the same people with the same objective: to genocide African Americans. Mhecky (talk) 13:49, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

@Mhecky: I believe you're referring to lynchings, which you linked to in that edit. I cannot find any contemporary sources that refer to lynchings as "negro killings". Based on your user page edits and this edit, I am not assuming good faith here. Please stop your trolling. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:31, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

@Doug Weller and Bbb23: I am smelling socks right now. The "over the top user page claiming minority statuses and social justice activism" while then trolling on race and LGBTQ pages and accusing others of bigotry seems very very familiar. Ring any bells for you? EvergreenFir (talk) 18:42, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

They've misused sources on various non-social justice articles too. Do you hear quacking? Citing (talk) 18:49, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, but after a review of their edits, nothing comes to mind. I have left an additional warning on their Talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:33, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both! EvergreenFir (talk) 22:48, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Given their history there's probably not much point in running CU, but I'd block them indefinitely if they make one more BS edit. Perhaps that's too much leeway already. Drmies (talk) 22:50, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

(@Drmies) I had to remove some more tabloid-sourced ragebait. Citing (talk) 18:32, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Why do you think the source is a tabloid? I won't even ask what ragebait means.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:36, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

IP edit warring

Would you be willing to take a look at [15] and their contributions since their most recent block expired? VQuakr (talk) 16:24, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

@VQuakr: I will keep an eye on this. The IP appears to be making legitimate attempts to solve the content dispute, but they are reverting quite a lot. If it continues, I think a partial block might be appropriate. EvergreenFir (talk) 00:14, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:China (region) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:30, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musical Instruments on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:30, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Chrystul Kizer Case

Why are you removing the evidence and charges of premeditated murder against Chrystul Kizer?

These are details/evidence publicly released directly by the arresting officers, detectives, and prosecuters.

You say some info was irrelevant and removed it, but you continue to leave Volar's prior criminal record information on the page, which has nothing to do with Chrystul Kizer's premeditation to kill Volar. As well as leaving up celebrity/media attention to the case.

It seems as if your only purpose is to not reveal actual pertinent info, relating to the murder and case, but moreso to create a sympathetic/activist editorial for Chrystul Kizer.

Seems a bit unethical for someone championing social justice awareness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quinoa813 (talk • contribs) 14:16, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

@Quinoa813: I removed it because (1) Wikipedia articles are not written like that and (2) at the moment Kizer's past actions are not a major part of this case at hand. We do not take the prosecutors' or defense's word as truth; we must say that these facts of the case listed in affidavits and charging documents are alleged until a verdict is rendered or reliable sources verify them and state them as fact. Additionally, we cannot use "lie" or "stole" or other words that indicate mens rea or carry negative value unless reliable sources widely use that word. Similar to other high profile cases (e.g., Rittenhouse, Aubrey, Floyd), we don't typically list out the past wrongdoings of victims or offenders unless many reliable sources say that info is important to the case. Sources often add filler info on backgrounds of people, but per WP:BLP (WP:BLPCRIME, WP:BLPPRIVACY) we don't include that info (cf. WP:COATRACK). The purpose of the Wikipedia article is not to present the prosecution's case, just to reflect what reliable sources say is important about the case and to reflect that info duly.

I recommend that you start a discussion on the article's talk page to see what other editors think about it (per bold, revert, discuss). I do appreciate that you want to help build this encyclopedia article and I tried to incorporate some of those list items into prose. The problem is more with how than what. EvergreenFir (talk) 17:13, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

User talk:Meters

Please ignore the ping to my talk page. I was just clarifying something that I didn't realize I had previously dealt with obvious, and have removed it. Meters (talk) 19:33, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

@Meters: no worries! EvergreenFir (talk) 19:34, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

It's just not my day... Meters (talk) 19:35, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

List of programs broadcast by Disney Channel‎

Hi, Evergreen Fir. As you are the last administrator who blocked InedibleHulk—admittedly, it was related to a TBAN, if I saw that correctly, but still—and as you are familiar with how television articles work, I was wondering if I could get your input here. They are ignoring guidelines—specifically ones like WP:STATUSQUO—and resources I provided on the talk page. We don't mark a series as over unless we have an official announcement/reliable source stating as such. If we don't have that, then we assume it is continuing and must at least wait until after a year has passed since the last new episode, per the infobox documentation, to mark it as over. I personally like to wait a little bit past that as well, as per WP:NOHURRY. So if a series hasn't aired a new episode since November 15, 2021, I will personally wait until end of day on November 15, 2022. And as you may be familiar, Nickelodeon and Disney Channel are notorious for not announcing a lot of things, sometimes not even season premieres/finales. Anyway, now they are trying to add a dubious template, saying it's dubious being in the current section because it's canceled. That's false. As there is no official word on this series, we must wait until after a year has passed before moving it from the current section to a former section. We can't make up our own facts and state it is canceled, or, more specifically, state it being in that section is dubious because it is canceled, when we have nothing official stating such. I have already left them a couple warnings. Thanks. Add: I may have been wrong on the usage of the dubious template, but that's minor and not part of the overall issue that shouldn't even be an issue. Amaury • 06:53, 4 December 2021 (UTC)