User talk:Richinstead

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Richinstead, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Introduction to Wikipedia
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page and [[Wikipedia:Article development|How to develop articles]! !//:;**¥¥¥¥£5555 the same time . I have
How to create your first article
Simplified Manual of Style

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Bearian (talk) 18:57, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

January 2015[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to West Virginia University Reed College of Media, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. Corkythehornetfan | Chat? 19:34, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 18[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Art Institute of Pittsburgh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frank Webb (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

University of Pittsburgh Image Size[edit]

Please read MOS:IMGSIZE to understand why "upright=scaling factor is preferred whenever possible" instead of using image_size = px. Thank you. Contributor321 (talk) 18:30, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. That’s helpful. I just thought they were a bit too small. Richinstead (talk) 23:17, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 18:53, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll ask you two questions, failure to answer these questions will result in a block:
Are you paid to edit on Wikipedia?

Are you affiliated to any of the subjects of the articles you edit on Wikipedia? --qedk (t 桜 c) 18:59, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No. I’m not a paid editor. I’m just a design nerd that loves brand standards. I wanted to update all of the pages to reflect the proper brand standards to be a helpful contributor to Wikipedia. I’m not affiliated with a y of the pages I’ve edited. Richinstead (talk) 23:14, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020[edit]

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

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

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Richinstead. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Richinstead|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:11, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not. I just want the pages to reflect helpful and accurate information. Richinstead (talk) 23:16, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your help. Richinstead (talk) 23:24, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not being paid at all. Richinstead (talk) 00:45, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello[edit]

No I do not work for Pitt. I’m an alum and noticed that all of their logos were outdated. I just updated then using the new university brand standards.

I also don’t work for the Adam Smith Society. I’m just trying to updates these pages with correct information. Richinstead (talk) 23:12, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Less problematic than expected, but...[edit]

Hey Richinstead,

we feared it may have been a case of undisclosed paid editing, but this is not the case then.

However, it has been correctly noted that your edits have been (unintentionally) promotional; there have been copyright and neutrality problems. As the conflict of interest (COI) guideline notes, editors with a COI are sometimes unaware of whether or how much it has influenced their editing. If COI editing causes disruption, an administrator may opt to place blocks on the involved accounts.

Let's solve the situation without a strict technical block. As you have edited articles directly with a conflict of interest, and as this has led to problems and a justified complaint, please request such edits on the talk page of articles instead of making them directly in the future. Simply click "Talk" at the top of any article, then "New section" and describe your proposed changes/additions, whenever you would like to change something in an article you have a connection to. Being an alumnus of a university does constitute a conflict of interest, as your past edits have sadly proven.

If you add the code {{request edit}} to your talk page message, volunteer reviewers will be notified about the request. Such requests are usually answered within 24 hours.

You are not strictly required to do this, but any further direct edits to articles that violate the copyright or neutrality policy will extremely likely lead to a block from editing that could easily be avoided by requesting changes on the talk page instead.

Thank you very much and best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:43, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User page creation request[edit]

Hi Richinstead,

please take a moment to describe your affiliation to the university on your user page, by clicking your red username and creating the page. A short sentence that says something like "I am a former student of XY University." is fine.

Ideally, this sentence should also be the first information in any edit requests on talk pages, to ensure transparency. However, neither the user page disclosure nor repeating the disclosure at the beginning of each request is required.

Thank you very much in advance and best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:49, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I’ve added that to my page. Richinstead (talk) 03:16, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again :) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 05:05, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome![edit]

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Richinstead. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 05:05, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Additional note/offer: Richinstead, if you like to, I can set up automatic archival of talk page messages here, just as it happens at User talk:ToBeFree. I'd simply use the same code to let the bot tidy up this talk page here too. Alternatively, feel free to manually remove any messages you'd like to remove – but I guess automated archival is a more long-term, sustainable solution. If you're interested, simply write ::{{u|ToBeFree}}: yes ~~~~ below. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 05:08, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Richinstead (talk) 11:40, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome and note about non-free logos[edit]

Hello Richinstead,

Welcome and thank you for your interest in maintaining Pitt-related Wikipedia information. I am the founder of the Pitt Wikiproject and invite you to join. Navigating the policies and practices of Wikipedia can be frustrating to new editors so I welcome you to contact me if you have any questions, either on wikipedia or off-wiki.

Please note that the updated Pitt logos you have uploaded have all been nominated for deletion as you are not the copyright holder as you indicated in the licensing description for these images and they include non-free artwork (the crest). Please see the non-free media use rationale for the university seal for a better way to document these images for use. A second example of non-free rationale would be File:Pennsylvania State University logo.svg. I would recommend updating your image descriptions immediately and replying to the nomination in Commons that the licensing has been corrected.CrazyPaco (talk) 16:31, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. If they are deleted I will no longer update these pages. If you like the Pitt logos to be modern and correct on the page I suggest you download the svg files I made and upload them way you want them. Sincerely, Richinstead. Richinstead (talk) 18:24, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note that I have nothing to do with this process, but just noticed the deletion notices. But, yes all of the image files will absolutely be deleted shortly unless the copyright information and non-free use rationale is updated appropriately on the image file information pages. These policies are strictly adhered to protect the Wikimedia Foundation from copyright violation issues. Image uploads are always carefully monitored by a dedicated group of editors for potential copyright violations. CrazyPaco (talk) 00:26, 17 February 2020 (UTC) P.S. CGS logo is already deleted.[reply]

@Crazypaco. Thanks! I've uploaded new logos. Hopefully, I did it correctly.

Unfortunately you did not do it correctly. The logos, because of the shield, are copyrighted, are not licensed under Creative Commons 4.0 (one cannot just state licenses that haven't been granted by the license holder). Because of this, they should not have be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Copyrighted images can only be uploaded to Wikipedia and their use in any article must be justified by inclusion of non-free use rational on the image file information page (usually in the form of a template such as in the examples that I provided above). The images may be eventually deleted, and if the university provides a take down order because of the inappropriately applied licensing tag, your account may be in danger of being banned. To do it correctly, the files in Commons should all be deleted and they should be reuploaded to Wikipedia with the correct non-free use rational template filled in. Let me know if you have any questions about this. CrazyPaco (talk) 05:27, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Does this looks okay? If not would you be willing to upload these logos correctly? I'm just trying to help the pages look connected but I don't know all the rules (and honestly this is not going to be a regular thing that I plan on doing). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:University-of-Pittsburgh-wordmark-new.svg#Summary

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:24, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Aaditya 7[edit]

Hello, Richinstead. You have new messages at Aaditya 7's talk page.
Message added 19:30, 15 December 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

– Aaditya_7 19:30, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022[edit]

Hello, I'm Isabelle Belato. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Doug Mastriano—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Isabelle ^🏳‍🌈 23:49, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Doug Mastriano, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you would like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Isabelle ^🏳‍🌈 23:51, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making a report about Isabelle Belato (talk · contribs · block log) at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, it appears that the editor you reported may not have engaged in vandalism, or the user was not sufficiently or appropriately warned. Please note there is a difference between vandalism and unhelpful or misguided edits made in good faith. If the user continues to vandalise after a recent final warning, please re-report it. Thank you. Ad Orientem (talk) 00:06, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Warning Please stop making inappropriate reports to WP:AIV. That noticeboard is only for obvious and naked vandalism or spamming. It is not for resolving content disputes or differences of opinion with other editors. Your behavior is disruptive. Please stop. Thank you. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:17, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hagahaha Richinstead (talk) 00:18, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Richinstead (talk) 00:20, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Acroterion (talk) 00:25, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:20, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Doug Mastriano. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 01:45, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:University-of-Pittsburgh-wordmark-new.svg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:University-of-Pittsburgh-wordmark-new.svg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:36, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it up[edit]

Hello, Richinstead. I just wanted to thank you for defending Doug Mastriano. Wikipedia is a left-wing, radical group that is looking to steal the 2022 PA gubernatorial election by trying to scam undecided voters who look up Mr. Mastriano into thinking he is a "far-right" white supremacist. I wanted to thank you for standing up for impartiality and fairness, and for Doug Mastriano's reputation. Keep it up, even as you continue to face radical leftists on here who try to shut you down. Good luck Unauthoress 02:18, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note of support. I just want Wikipedia to live up to its founding ideals and not slip into a political platform. Richinstead (talk) 03:38, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Doug Mastriano has an edit summary that appears to be inadequate, inaccurate, or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 04:08, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I added a comment noting that I fixed it. It was hyperlinked for no reason. Richinstead (talk) 04:11, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote on the talk page that you didn't like the content at the linked page and wanted the link removed. Two minutes later, you removed the link, falsely claiming you fixed a typo. Don't use deception to attempt to subvert consensus. You are heading towards a much longer block. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 04:18, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is a typo Richinstead (talk) 12:19, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice[edit]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

― Tartan357 ^Talk 04:10, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hahahaha Richinstead (talk) 04:14, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Too long, didn’t read. Richinstead (talk) 04:15, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good for you. I don't really care if you read it, I just have to give you this before I can request you be blocked at Arbitration Enforcement. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 04:19, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

POV vandalism[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at James O'Keefe. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 02:16, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're headed for a block as NOTHERE and/or an AP2 topic ban. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 02:16, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

keeping that hyperlink is vandalism and wrong. How do we approve that edit, master? ;) Richinstead (talk) 02:34, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history, personal attacks on other editors, spamming of unsourced personal opinion screeds, and edit warring make it clear you lack the basic competency to edit here and that you are NOTHERE. It's time for an indef DS block. Pinging User:Muboshgu. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 04:09, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder what an SPI would turn up? Maybe your defender on this page, User:Unauthoress, who also has a thing for Doug Mastriano? Maybe that's just a coincidence, but if it quacks like..... Wow! The more I look at the few large screeds left on talk pages by Unauthoress, the greater the resemblance to Richinstead. Is that meant as Rich "instead" of Authoress? The allergic reaction to "far-right" linking, mentions of Hitler, etc. The quacking is loud.

BTW, don't let this possible socking be a distraction. The current behavior is grounds enough for a block or ban. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 04:23, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Nope. I don’t even like Doug, but went to his page to learn more and read all of the slander, and was like whoa! This is all opinion. I thought we’re supposed to be objective. Then I added my two cents worth. This is my only account. I don’t have the energy to manage multiple. God bless. Richinstead (talk) 13:37, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Objectivity isn't something you can aim for in a situation like this, it's not like physics. See Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Doug Weller talk 15:29, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022[edit]

To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.

Orange Mike | Talk 15:33, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

Haha Richinstead (talk) 20:55, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry[edit]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Richinstead. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Girth Summit _(blether) 09:46, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]