User talk:Starship.paint/Archive 15

There is a discussion currently ongoing in which we are trying to reach a consensus if Diva Dirt is reliable. You can view the discussion here. There has only been a couple of people who have responded. We need a wider input from more people. You're response is needed and appreciated. Thanks. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 21:37, 15 January 2018 (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 that 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.

— Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 12:39, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

With this edit you have violated the page restrictions referenced above, which are in force at article Melania Trump. Please edit carefully going forward. — JFG ^talk 16:17, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Ah I thought only 1RR was in effect. I never saw the "consensus upon revert" thing before. starship.paint ~ KO 01:07, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is akin to an "enforced BRD" rule. Often used on hot controversial topics. — JFG ^talk 20:16, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just letting you know the text was implemented (version 3), and that there is currently another RfC. At the moment, it doesn't seem that editors are interested in the latest RfC. And at the draft page, we are discussing how to preserve the draft. Anyway, at the article talk page, I remember you noting that you were busy, and I see that you haven't edited in a few days. So I'm updating you on the happenings. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:33, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Timeline of the Trump presidency, 2018 Q1, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Doug Jones (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, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Presidency of Donald Trump, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. SMP0328. (talk) 03:18, 18 March 2018 (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 living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, 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 that 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.

Hi. In addition to the refreshed BLP warning and the Post-1932 American Politics warning recently added by Coffee... Please stop edit warring at Dana Loesch. We've discussed the matter and it isn't resolved, so at this point if you insist on including that content in the article I'd suggest that you pursue dispute resolution. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 23:41, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We were editing March for Our Lives at the same time. When I clicked Save, Wikipedia accepted my version, but it may have stomped on edits you had just made. It would be easier (for me, anyway) for you to make your edits again than for me to patch them in. Sorry for the inconvenience. —Anomalocaris (talk) 08:33, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Spygate (conspiracy theory), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Hayden (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, there! It looks like you did a wonderful job of expanding the Spygate article that I tried to create but that got reverted into a disambiguation page. At least the article actually exists! Also, did you do a copy-and-paste when you first created the new article? I don't see my username in the history anywhere, but the first version of the article is definitely the one that I started. I've asked for a history merge to swing these together, though I've no idea how an admin will handle it. Anyhow, just wanted to say "Nice job!" The piece needed to be written, because the public is looking for it everywhere. Well done. A loose noose (talk) 14:59, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi A loose noose, I did do a copy and paste. Thank you for the plaudits. I did include you in the DYK nomination.
• On a related note, what do you think of these edits? [1] [2]. I do not really agree with them. Perhaps you could weigh in on the talk page. starship.paint ~ KO 15:03, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Spygate (conspiracy theory), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Speaker of the House of Representatives (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mike Huckabee, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mother Jones (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Spygate (conspiracy theory) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 04:04, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your edit at Presidency of Donald Trump seems to partly restore, without obtaining consensus on the talk page, your similar edit that was challenged, hence violating page restrictions.

• Your original edit: 5 August 2018
• Challenge: 8 August 2018
• Restoration 18 August 2018

Please self-revert. Politrukki (talk) 15:11, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that you are using the vague edit summary of "add" in most of your recent article edits. Could you please take a few extra seconds per edit to write a few words about what you're adding? ~Awilley (talk) 13:59, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm adding stuff... starship.paint ~ KO 03:09, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you'd briefly specify what you are adding, it would be easier for your fellow editors to understand what happened to an article, just from its history, without reading every diff. — JFG ^talk 05:00, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm trying, okay? starship.paint ~ KO 08:05, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed: many thanks! — JFG ^talk 09:12, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Aung San Suu Kyi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page AFP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Jamal Khashoggi. Looks like you Forgot to declare these refs here. Please declare or remove that as it is causing ref errors at Assassination of Jamal Khashoggi and [Jamal Khashoggi]] DBigXrayᗙ 08:53, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Powderkegg: @203.106.221.220: @PlayPus2: @Crawnax: @GeicoHen:@Ribbon Salminen:@HughMorris15: @Liljosheeyaaaa: Nevile is no more in WWE and he went back using his old known Pac Ring Name. Support the PAGE Move Request

Move Request > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Neville_(wrestler)#Requested_move_13_November_2018

Colton Meltzer (talk) 01:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Starship.paint. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]