User talk:Volvlogia: Difference between revisions

Me

Hello, I'm Dcirovic. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Carl Grimes— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Dcirovic (talk) 18:02, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Template:Z33 Dervorguilla (talk) 06:14, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am the original author. Your edits /comment were not helpful. Camimack (talk) 16:51, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. There is no consensus for that tag, nor actionable justification for it. If you continue without talk page discussion ANI will be notified. -- GreenC 17:22, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Uncle Milty. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Jared Fogle have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. | Uncle Milty | talk | 16:03, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alonso Duralde, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages East Point and Georgia. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:57, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Volvlogia. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm North Shoreman. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Pig War (1859) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 02:28, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People who were shot by a U.S. Vice President, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Lwarrenwiki (talk) 20:51, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Owen's Scrapbook requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Pmedema (talk) 23:40, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:OwensScrapbook.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:56, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You said you created this as a joke--I deleted it as a pretty serious violation of WP:BLP. You can't go around calling someone's ----- a ------ -------- based on a YouTube video. Drmies (talk) 01:59, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I, Jamesjpk (talk), would like to invite you to join WikiProject YouTube! We're working on: Writing, cleaning up, and expanding articles about YouTube, in particular, these articles Putting {{WikiProject YouTube}} on the talk pages of articles involving YouTube, and assessing articles with the template. This helps to categorize articles! Sourcing BLP's affiliated with YouTube Updating the project page, and spreading word about the project and more! It seems you might be interested, so please stop by! Thank you. You were given this message because of your involvement in the MatPat Wikipedia Article (talk page).

I believe you were the first editor of James C. Mahan to refer to Donald Trump as the "presumptive nominee". I invite you to add any comment you may have to a discussion at Talk:Attempted assassination of Donald Trump#Presumptive nominee. —Anomalocaris (talk) 15:48, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on The Weekly Planet requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. PamD 07:29, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your recent edit to Hell, Michigan appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person or organization added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. John from Idegon (talk) 23:29, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited David Blumenthal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:10, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article Tyler O'Day has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability, no references to reliable sources that demonstrate notability, search does not reveal anything but brief mentions.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 00:50, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Tyler O'Day requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. TheWarOfArt (talk) 02:28, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Ianic Roy Richard requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. power~enwiki (π, ν) 22:23, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Although I'm not the person who deleted the article, I responded on the talk page to your comment on why it shouldn't be deleted. Just in case you didn't actually see it, I wanted to repost it here for context:

Being a "major player" on Medium is not a Wikipedia notability criterion in and of itself, and all of this article's sources are to his own content. A person gets a Wikipedia article by being the subject of reliable source coverage written by other people, not by being the author of his own sources.

In other words, to make a person notable enough for a Wikipedia article, it is not enough to use his own self-published sources to demonstrate that he exists. You need to use reliable sources that are independent of him to prove that media are paying attention to his accomplishments. Hope that clarifies things a bit. Bearcat (talk) 17:31, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that clarifies things for me. --Volvlogia (talk) 02:44, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Chuggaaconroy.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Train2104 (t • c) 16:54, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Jd22292. I noticed that you removed topically-relevant content from Yooka-Laylee. However, Wikipedia is not censored to remove content that might be considered objectionable. Please do not remove or censor information that directly relates to the subject of the article. If the content in question involves images, you have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide images that you may find offensive. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk • contribs) 00:40, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article John J. O'Brien (banker) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't meet WP:GNG or any SNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. power~enwiki (π, ν) 21:37, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Volvlogia. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kyle Yunaska is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kyle Yunaska until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 09:00, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John R. Bolton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CPAC (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) 09:09, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article Mario J. Lanza has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. --Animalparty! (talk) 19:21, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article Mario J. Lanza has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I am unable to find significant discussion of this individual in multiple reliable sources per WP:GNG guidelines.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ... discospinster _talk 21:34, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mario J. Lanza. Since you had some involvement with the Mario J. Lanza redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. ... discospinster _talk 17:29, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you alter my ANI comments again, you'll be at 3RR-Do not alter others' comments. We hope (talk) 00:50, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are a hypocrite. --Volvlogia (talk) 00:52, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ever heard of the phrase, "make sure your own hands are clean"? You're complaining about another editor's behavior but violate WP:POLEMIC. Everything you do to poke other editors is going to be examined by the arbs should you go that route. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:22, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that and I regret some of my hotheadedness, but I think my few impolite statements pale in comparison to Cassianto consistent behavioral violations. --Volvlogia (talk) 02:25, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Given that your request is about Cassianto, they should probably be named as a party. You also need to notify We hope and provide the diff as you have named them as a party. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:53, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, stop canvassing editors you know will agree with you to give statements. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:58, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was asking people who have had first-hand interactions with Cassianto to consider giving statements, as a layer would search for witnesses before appearing for a judge? Is that against the rules? If so, I will stop. --Volvlogia (talk) 03:03, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is. See WP:CANVASS. --Floquenbeam (talk) 03:04, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't think it was Spamming, I only intended to contact those 3 who were prominently involved, but for the sake of the Arbitration's integrity I won't continue. --Volvlogia (talk) 03:10, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Volvlogia: a bit of advice as the person who was the filing party in the last ArbCom case: the people who are involved with the dispute will be well aware of what is going on, so there is no need to inform anyone who hasn't been named a party (with how watchlists work, I promise you that will serve as notification enough for anyone who is at all interested, and it also addresses Floquenbeam's concern.) If the case is accepted committee can add anyone they think should be a party, so there is no need for you to ask someone to co-sign with you. As the filing party, you probably could get away with naming more parties to the case now, but I wouldn't: you're a relatively inexperienced user filing a case in what is probably the most complex environment on Wikipedia. Answer the committee's questions when they have them, be transparent, and civil, and try not to get too frustrated when the request and/or case gets overly complex or heated. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:52, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate the advice. I intend to fully cooperate with the arbitration process, keep things civil and out and the open, and pursue a resolution in an ethical, proper, and official way. I have nothing to hide. I appreciate your advice and promise to go along with this process to the best of my ability. --Volvlogia (talk) 03:55, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Volvlogia, this is a friendly request; please stop pinging me. I'm finding it really irritating getting these notifications when I'm the one actually going about trying to improve the project. I'm really not interested in this loony drama you seem to have created at the prompt of absolutely nothing, so you can do what you like; but please, I don't want to be a party to it. Thanks. Cassianto^Talk 08:18, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your statement in your case request, the first paragraph ("Especially in recent months...") makes multiple assertions about another editor without linking to diffs which evidence those assertions. You need to provide diffs which demonstrate what you say. I have removed this paragraph, but would like you please to re-add it with diffs evidencing what you say. GoldenRing (talk) 14:16, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]