User talk:331dot/Archive 11

Hi 331dot, apologies for rushing to report the accounts. I wasn't aware that there could be other reasons why they might create accounts. Thank you for your advice. I'll make sure not to repeat the same mistake. Have a very happy new year. Ashleyyoursmile! 13:42, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLP violations. 331dot (talk) 13:45, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Okay, noted. I will keep that in mind. :) --Ashleyyoursmile! 13:47, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please unblock this user. Their account is verified in OTRS. Thanks, Sam-2727 (talk) 17:37, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, but how am i supposed to know which is a reliable source and which isn't?Sarmiento 007 (talk) 20:57, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RSP. 331dot (talk) 21:14, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).

Administrator changes Hammersoft Andres • Brion VIBBER • Rkitko • Thatcher

CheckUser changes Barkeep49 • BDD • CaptainEek • Primefac Oversight changes Barkeep49 • BDD • CaptainEek Joe Roe

Guideline and policy news

• T3 (duplication and hardcoded instances) has been repealed following a request for comment
  .

Technical news

• You can now put pages on your watchlist for a limited period of time.

Arbitration

• By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes). The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason).
• Following the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, BDD, Bradv, CaptainEek, L235, Maxim, Primefac.

Below is the entry I wish to publish for The British School of Paris. i have tried my best to keep it factual and have added a reference for the history at thee end. What is wrong with it? please could it be posted by someone who knows what they are doing? I have been trying for several weeks. Any help will be graatefully received. Thank you for your expertise.

The British School of Paris has a long history as a provider of British education in Paris. It is an independent fee-paying school with around 700 pupils, representing well over 50 nationalities. The BSP is one of the largest and longest-established British international schools in the world. The educational programme is based on the National Curriculum for England and Wales and its Patron is the serving British Ambassador to France. The school is located in the western suburbs of Paris in the small market town of Croissy-sur-Seine. Founded by Mary J. Cosyn in 1954, the then 'English School of Paris' quickly moved from its original Parisian address to the Chateau de Monte Cristo, the former home of Alexander Dumas, in Le Pecq just west of Paris. The majority of pupils in the early years were British, American and Canadian with parents employed mainly at the Supreme Headquarters of the Allied Powers in Europe (SHAPE). In 1964, the School moved again to its current home Llesna Court, 38 quai de l'Ecluse, Croissy-sur-Seine. By 1973 the continued rise in pupil numbers lead to the purchase of a second property in Bougival, specifically to house the Junior School pupils. In 1980 the school was transferred from private ownership and established under French law as the equivalent of a British charitable trust - a ‘not-for-profit’ association. With this change of status a Board of Governors was appointed with responsibility for overseeing the running and development of the School. By 1981 the school was officially renamed as The British School of Paris. During the intervening years expansion of both facilities and pupil numbers culminated in 2010 with the opening of a purpose-built Junior School just along the river from the Senior School campus. Campus development at the Senior School also evolved significantly, a refurbished multipurpose hall (the Kett Building) was inaugurated in December 2018 and an outdoor learning space will be completed by Spring 2021.

Reference French Lessons - The Story of The British School of Paris by Vicky Honour

91.90.97.124 (talk) 16:29, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you represent the school, you must review

paid editing

for information on formal disclosures you must make. This is easier to do with an account, but an account is not required. I gather you represent the school from the nature of the text you propose above.

The text you propose sounds like a promotional brochure for the school. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about a subject. Wikipedia summarizes what independent

primary sources). This text you propose has no sources at all and would not be accepted. 331dot (talk) 16:38, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello 331dot, The cited content is about an actor Rajinikanth not about Maridhas. 157.51.22.191 (talk) 11:55, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay; however, since your edits leave not much behind, the article should probably be proposed for deletion. 331dot (talk) 11:57, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but there is a current discussion to move it to draft in the talk page. 157.51.22.191 (talk) 12:00, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That would work too. 331dot (talk) 12:11, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thanks for your note. I am doing this as a volunteer position for the ACSF group. So what exactly should I do? I am wondering how does other organization create articles such as companies. I am new to all of this and it is very confusing. I really appreciate if you just tell me what i need to do to make sure the page is published correctly and accepted by Wikipedia. Thanks again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esmaeili.nooshin (talk • contribs) 00:31, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

other alternative where that is permitted. I've said what you need to do in response to your previous inquiry. 331dot (talk) 00:37, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

I would probably leave it for now; this whole situation is being discussed on their user talk page. 331dot (talk) 14:08, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

...but I now see that it was removed; and if it's okay with them it's okay with me. 331dot (talk) 14:08, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I thought I'd continue this here in order to try to reduce the temperature, since Ahrtoodeetoo is clearly pretty bothered by your messages.

I get what you mean - It might not hurt to update the block log.

I was leaning towards an unblock offer after assurances that it was a one-time issue, and won't happen again - now I think I'm going to remove that page from my watchlist. SQL^{Query me!} 19:46, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SQL I appreciate your wisdom and I will do so. 331dot (talk) 19:49, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the hard work, 331dot. Sorry for getting you embroiled in this matter. SQL, does that mean that the unblock request is declined? I don't think that's been carried out. Sdrqaz (talk) 20:23, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sdrqaz: - I had not declined that request. I was considering the request - but I am going to leave it open for another opinion. SQL^{Query me!} 20:26, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see SQL. Thank you for your time. Sdrqaz (talk) 20:29, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just like to note that I would object to an unblock of r2 at this time and in fact think this should be a ban given his years of incivility and inability to collaborate. There's a slew of PAs in the last few years, combined with his combative "it's not my fault" behavior that leads me to believe he's not actually here to contribute so much as argue and berate people. GRINCHIDICAE🎄 20:26, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sdrqaz No apology is necessary; it's part of the role. I'm just disappointed they don't seem to want to engage with others and responded to my simple, civil inquiry with personal attacks and indignation. Wasn't my intention at all- I just asked a question. 331dot (talk) 20:28, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

331dot, I have copied Ahrtoodeetoo's appeal to ANI per their request.

I'm not certain why that is necessary for their unblock request, but it's not something I outright oppose. 331dot (talk) 14:43, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neither am I, but that was their will, I believe. I see some of their comments on their user talk page are beyond pale, but I still somehow believe they can be reasoned with. Thank you for your patience and thanks for everyone who have tried to steer Ahrtoodeetoo to the right path. They certainly have not made it easy. Apologies to everyone involved in advance on my behalf.

Politrukki (talk) 16:24, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

331dot, some unsolicited advise: I consider WP:NOTHERE to be a fairly narrow subset of WP:DE, with the latter usually serving as my default (most common, by far) block reasoning, overall (though, in this case, WP:NPA is definitely apt, too). El_C 00:20, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@

WP:DE is normally my go-to too. SQL^{Query me!} 00:25, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

SQL, makes sense. It is probably the widest (blanket) reasoning available. Also noting that I just declined Ahrtoodeetoo's unblock request. El_C 00:36, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@El C: Not sure if you were aware, but this request was being discussed at AN. SQL^{Query me!} 00:48, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, SQL. I made a note in that AN thread to that effect. El_C 00:51, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

With this did you mean -author? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:20, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I did. Thank you 331dot (talk) 22:39, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 331dot, I was wondering if you could help me out with a certain situation on my user talk page. Overall I was contacted by another User in regard to my activity on Wikipedia with a valid concern from them. However, I was told to not do anything on Wiki by this User with a nick Jack Frost, until I reply to their message. Thing is, I looked into their user page, and they don't seem to be a moderator, much less an admin. I have replied to their concern, but they didn't reply for 2 days now, and I feel prevented from being able to use Wikipedia due to this. If you could look into my user talk page, and give me your input on this, I would be very much obliged. Kind regards MartinOrl087 (talk) 08:06, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MartinOrl087 Any user may issue a warning to another user; that's what Jack Frost did. I don't speak for them, so you could ask them directly, but it is possible that your answer satisfied them and they saw no need to comment further, or that they simply haven't seen it yet. I would suggest asking them directly.

If you were editing for a friend, it is still a

conflict of interest

that you should formally disclose, even if you weren't paid by the friend. If you work in SEO, I must be honest and tell you that it looks very suspicious to edit about a company and then say "I wasn't paid for that one" as we have no way to know that for certain. I have no evidence to the contrary, so I will assume good faith and believe you. But it is going to likely cause you much grief and suspicion if you keep editing about companies. My suggestion would be to avoid editing about non-clients so as long as you are in the SEO field, or to at least clearly disclose who you work for on your user page and clearly log the edits you make that are just a conflict of interest.

I would correct you in that Wikipedia is not merely a database; it is an encyclopedia, where article subjects must be shown with significant coverage in independent

a notable company. 331dot (talk) 10:34, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

List of scooter manufacturers many of them lack any notability on wikipedia page. An example from the very top is Aeon Motor, no references but their own website. To be honest, when I was writing an article, I did research on how others have written simialr articles for companies like this, as a point of reference, and have noticed that most don't have notability at all on the Wiki. This leaves me completely confused so if you could be so kind as to explain it to me, I would be most grateful for the knowledge for future use on wiki.MartinOrl087 (talk) 13:05, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

assume good faith

. You can mitigate any suspicion somewhat by being completely open about your editing and answering questions honestly(not that you have done otherwise, just saying).

Regarding other articles, it is entirely possible that those articles are themselves problematic and simply have not been addressed yet. (the Aeon Motor article has existed since 2007, for example, but I've tagged it as problematic) As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible to get inappropriate articles by us, and with over 6 million articles and only several thousand regular participants, it's hard to address every problematic article quickly. We can only address what we know about, but everyone does what they can do. Standards have also changed over time, and what was once acceptable may no longer be. 331dot (talk) 13:15, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

331dot now I get it, thank you for clarification, I will try to be more open about my edits/contributions in the future to avoid any situation where someone might see my activity as suspicious. I can imagine it is hard to manage Wikipedia, with so many daily users as this project is in constant motion. Still I want to do what I can and when I can to contribute positively, one thing might be providing translation in my native language to the article I wrote, since Veleco is a European based brand. If this were something small-time in one country, I myself would most likely not bother writing any article at all, but if something is this big and lacks an article I found it surprisingly lacking and decided to contribute. I will make those contributions via suggestions though to not get accused of any misconduct here. In spare time I might also review other scooter manufacturers since now I'm more familiar with the subject and maybe mark them in some way if they don't meet Wikipedia's standards, because that list is quite messy.MartinOrl087 (talk) 13:29, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are hereby notified that our dispute has been taken to

You're totally a WFG tool, aren't ya? It's a pyramid scheme bro. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.59.73.203 (talk) 06:30, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What matters is not what you or I think, but what independent

reliable sources state. If you have independent sources that describe the group that way, please offer them. 331dot (talk) 10:00, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

A cute doggo for ye!

	Thank You for being a cool wikipedian!
	Thank you so much for your contributions and support for wikipedia! -- KindCowboy69 ☮ 07:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Asking

I was asking why I was blocked can you explain why I was blocked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.173.249.59 (talk) 18:20, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know who you are by your IP address, but posting while logged out is considered block evasion. Please return to your account to request unblock. 331dot (talk) 18:25, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My IP changed because I'm on a hotspot and I made the edit on cellular. The block passed as it was a 31 hour block and it's been more than 31 hours since I was blocked. Why was I blocked. Also my IP was 2600:1003:B00D:7948:8056:F218:9D7D:468D — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.173.249.59 (talk) 18:33, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please post at the bottom instead of the top of the page. If your IP changed because you moved from one network to another, you may need to clear your browser's cache as cookies could cause Wikipedia to "think" you are still on the blocked IP. 331dot (talk) 19:06, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I saw your name pop up at in this list and I'm contacting you because of the wise advice given at

I want to ask if the following is an example of canvassing? If not, I apologize for taking everyone's time.

If I have misread the situation then I'd appreciate if you could point out the error in my thinking.VR _talk 21:20, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As I repeatedly told VR, I have no idea what Watchonly would think of this dispute, but since they were editing a related page, I wanted to get their input. (Both of these articles concern impacts of the Holocaust in the Mediterranean region.) Brigade Piron had previously expressed interest in the article, as you can see from discussion at my user talk page. (t · c) buidhe 21:23, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The two discussions both involve an aspect of the Holocaust, so there is a relation there. I respectfully am also not seeing what is non-neutral about the message Buidhe made, and they don't seem to be soliciting like-minded editors who share their views. It is not canvassing- as far as I am aware- to notify potentially interested editors of discussions related to their interest, as long as they are not simply notifying people to come to a particular discussion and advocate for or support a particular viewpoint. 331dot (talk) 21:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The "non-neutral" part is referring to buidhe inviting someone to a discussion about the reliability of Stanford Shaw, but calling Shaw "basically a work of fiction" in that message. To me that sounds like buidhe wanted the user to support their viewpoint (which is what the user ended up doing).

Thanks for your input!VR _talk 21:44, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The answers never shock is definitely Evlekis. They've been targeting that CVUA page over and over again. Pahunkat (talk) 13:24, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help 331dot :-) Pahunkat (talk) 13:28, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, My Account was Blocked due to my actions including Copyright Infringement, edit warring. I had uploaded various images from third-party sites without knowing the usage license. Now I am aware of the same and understand that using copyrighted images are seriously prohibited. Please help me get back my account as i feel the block is no longer necessary as I will abide by the rules of Wikipedia. Can you please assist me with the same . Eldhose ^Talk 14:17, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To be unblocked from your Article/Draft space block, please make another unblock request on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 14:19, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to request the below change. Could you please let me know if you can assist? Thank you in advance. Kerlouche83 (talk) 19:23, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Change request to UNFCU page Information to be added: CEO- John Lewis Information to be added: Executive Vice President- Pamela Agnone Information to be removed: CEO- William Predmore

• Explanation of issue: William Predmore retired on 31st December 2020 and John Lewis has been named as the new CEO of UNFCU as of January 1st 2021
• References supporting change: https://www.unfcu.org/leadership/

edit request(click for instructions) on the article talk page, Talk:United Nations Federal Credit Union. 331dot (talk) 23:12, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Some baklava for you!

Hello! Seems like you are interesting! 11Jasejusttestingzapppp (talk) 01:07, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Campbell X

Hi there, thanks for your message. I am not involved in an edit war: I was part of the group that created the page as part of [[1]], and have been asked by the subject to delete the page, and as part of the team that created it, I think this should be possible (the actual creator is no longer active on Wikipedia but I have contacted her offline). As I can't delete the page, I have made changes that the subject asked for, deleting links and references that deadname him. I have left a message with the helpdesk asking for the page to be deleted, and flagged it for deletion, on the same basis.

Another user reverted the page after my edits, which deleted links and references containing deadname and incorrect pronouns (this is as per Wikipedia's own Gender Identity guidelines). The page should be deleted as per my request, as it is causing the subject severe mental distress. Not everyone can transition in public view like the Wachowskis, so "publicly available information" is not a good standard test in the case of transition. The page's existence is causing active harm, and this should be considered as a reason for immediate deletion.

Please feel free to push this request to a senior editor or administrator, as I don't have that access. I don't want to be involved in an "edit war," I am trying to act ethically on behalf of a person in pain that is being exacerbated by Wikipedia.

edit requests

on the talk page. You cannot keep editing the article to your preferred version; that is considered edit warring.

The article should reflect the pronouns appropriate for the person, per

MOS:GENDERID. 331dot (talk) 14:26, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Sophiemayer

I'm sorry; your edit where you tried that was not the way to start a discussion. I would be willing to do so as a courtesy.

The pronouns were only reverted because they were part of a larger edit. 331dot (talk) 15:03, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All of the edit is valid: the pronouns on the page should be he/him, and all references from before 2020 should be deleted. The page should be deleted. I'm responsible for the creation of the page as part of a wiki-a-thon and am now asking for it to be removed. If you're willing to re-enter the tag for proposed deletion as a courtesy, I'd be very grateful. Deletion is the final goal and preferred outcome.

I will do so fairly soon. I will simply create the discussion and leave you to put in a statement. 331dot (talk) 15:56, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate that note; I'm kind of a stickler for formatting. I removed them once already, but I wasn't going to drop an indef-block for italic abuse. I do think that "fuck you and the horse you rode in on" is a wonderful expression. And people say Americans don't contribute anything to the beauty of the world! Ha! (and there's Häagen-Dazs too...) Drmies (talk) 22:57, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My username wasn't blatant nor serious. It is my real name which I had already said. This seemed more like personal out of taste. Which you seriously try to injure beyond repair without any justification to truly try to ease. Using all your power to banish and suppress. One doesn't justify all. Perhaps in your little world. A Note, which was weak. I didn't wish anything, and you damn right I was pissed. All I did was try to help and correct an obvious error and this caused a ban? A Ban? For helping? Be serious. Of course I wouldn't like to be blocked for trying to contribute over something so insignificant. Had I not tried to help I wouldn't have been Blocked. Your mark is weak and your attitude poor. Dot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Threesom666 (talk • contribs) 10:50, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Threesom666 I accept the judgement of the community on this matter, and will use it as a learning experience going forward. I don't see it as a win or lose matter and it's not about power. I had responded to a good faith report about your username. There was nothing personal about it and I had never heard of you before this that I can recall. It was a soft block allowing you to create a new account so if I was suppressing you I did a bad job. I understand why you might feel as you do but please don't ascribe motives to me or the user that reported you that I don't have, and try to put yourself in the other's shoes and at least understand why they saw it that way. I understand that you might not feel the same, but I wish you well on your future participation here. 331dot (talk) 13:34, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You responded in good faith to him but what about me? You had to judge and you judged against me because you YOU felt it was a provocative name but instead of contacting me and trying to figure it out you blocked. Now your saying that I was "soft" blocked meaning my ip wasn't blocked as if I couldn't get around that. But you blocked my entire account as denotating you did a good job but I didn't care about making another account. All I care about is this account and fairness. In your opinion suppressing me would've had to come at a cost of wiping me out completely out of wikipedia which is exactly the type of attitude which I'm talking about which is extremist. Now I feel your behavior and attitude isn't fair. I can't put myself in yours shoes because I am not unsympathetic.

Might I suggest you drop this? Between your edits here and on other users talk pages, this is beginning to look like trolling. CUPIDICAE💕 20:45, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Threesom666 I again reiterate I had no bad motives towards you, and I am using this as a learning experience. I regret that you have considered dialing back your Wikipedia participation, which was not my intention whatsoever. I again simply urge you to see things as others saw them, not as a excuse, but simply for greater understanding. I'm moving forward here. 331dot (talk) 20:47, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See it as however you want. Your views are always accurate. Stop following me.

How was it not your intention when you literally blocked me from doing anything? I don't know how clear your views are. When you say " put yourself in other's shoes", perhaps you should follow your own advice. You have your own views on your own intentions and I have mine. You weren't always moving any other way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Threesom666 (talk • contribs) 20:55, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Threesom666 I am not following you. I don't have you in my watchlist and won't. Never heard of you before I saw the report. I have no idea what you have been doing other than communicating with me. I'm not always right, and don't claim to be. I'm not trying to win or be recognized. My thinking was that you would reply with either 1, a proposed new username or 2, explained why the name was appropriate. You said "my screen name is my name" but it wasn't clear to me that you meant it was your legal name. I regret my misinterpretation caused you grief and to reevaluate your Wikipedia participation. I can only tell you that I will use this to improve going forward. 331dot (talk) 21:00, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)@Threesom666: I would strongly suggest dropping this now. Based on the section title here, I'm in agreement with Praxidicae above, that this is starting to look a lot like trolling / blockable disruptive editing. 331dot isn't following you around anywhere. SQL^{Query me!} 21:01, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As a courtesy wanted to let you know I've pulled Larry King because 5 of the 6 responses after posting were opposes and pull requests, so we probably need more discussion. Consensus may develop to post, but for now it's more proper to take it off. -- Fuzheado | Talk 22:48, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fuzheado Thanks for the heads up, although I obviously disagree. I think on strength of arguments posting won out, but we will see. 331dot (talk) 23:31, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do you agree with what I have to say about Alex Jones and cannabis? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LotteryGeek (talk • contribs) 04:05, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	The Editor's Barnstar
	You are one the best editors ever. CoolGuy1920 (talk) 18:57, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi , As you enlighten me about IMDb as a poor source can you help me in finding sources . Firstly i wanted to know , can i use official hotstar video (copyrighted content) as a source . Secondly i want to know how to make video citation using time stamp . I also want to know where can i get reliable third party sources for a director , who never gave a personal interview .Being a cousin i know about him but not able to find sources. please help 🥺 Khan Ahsan 1 (talk) 17:48, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

primary source and do not establish notability. Videos can be used as a source(as long as they are independent of the subject, about the subject, and more than a brief mention), see this page. If enough sources do not exist, he would not merit a Wikipedia article at this time. 331dot (talk) 18:15, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thank you for understanding, I will not disappoint. :D WeißFocusRS (talk) 18:07, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

editor you blocked before back again same thing

You previously blocked him [2] for removing the controversy section at Wonder Woman. Now he is back and did the same exact thing once more. This single purpose account Special:Contributions/T-stud seems to not have any other purpose, having only done a few edits back in 2011 on a single article, then returning to vandalize this article time and again. Dream Focus 06:19, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked again. We'll give them one more chance to respond. 331dot (talk) 08:57, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for at least responding. I understand that there may be millions of "soapboxing idiots" on the web and you do not have time or interest in addressing each erroneous concern and or you have a "job" to eliminate spam. I also want to humbly explain that I was asking for help. Now that I know that it cannot be found here or through you, I will desist. Know this; Fartfist may reveal the worst nature in the shallow and the best in the confident person. I appreciate your time and am very entertained by this. I am learning more everyday about how to "professionally" represent and succeed. There will come a time for every lesson and experience, but FF is not going away and you cannot stop this fact with the power you hold to control "edits". Thank you for my "Warning", however someone will be editing this "portal of unearned confidence and authority" on the internet to accommodate Fartfist's existence. Have fun with being super touchy on the internet. I forgive you.

Absolute Best and Sincere Regards,

FARTFIST [email protected] fartfist.wordpress.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.26.112.30 (talk) 16:10, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to ask for help in good faith, then please do so. That's not what you posted. 331dot (talk) 17:55, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The page you deleted via G11 today is back as Version 2. The author explained that the page is about a foundation he started to use a technology he invented. The author's use of Wikipedia seems exclusively promotional. Possibly (talk) 01:48, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[Sock] is Evlekis - could you please pull TPA? Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 10:37, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All done. 331dot (talk) 10:39, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks 331dot, that username was always going to be registered at some stage by them. Pahunkat (talk) 10:40, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2021).

Administrator changes Hog Farm Mattflaschen • Nandesuka • Savidan • Wangi

CheckUser changes Berean Hunter • Xeno Oversight changes Someguy1221 • Xeno

Arbitration

• The
  standard discretionary sanctions authorized for American Politics were amended by motion
  to cover post-1992 politics of United States and closely related people, replacing the 1932 cutoff.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2021 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2021, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2021, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• Wikipedia has now been around for 20 years, and recently saw its billionth edit!

I see you are Stalin and Hitler,[3] congratulations. Responding at the Teahouse must be so rewarding! Have a slice of Dobos cake in recognition of your efforts to help new users! Bishonen | tålk 13:48, 3 February 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Hello 331dot, I just revived my old account (this one) and now I want usurp the username of my new account (Kamilalibhat). I confirm that both accounts are mine and I have total control over them. I wanna make this account as my primary account and retire new one (Kamilalibhat). –

You may make a request at WP:USURP, but in this situation typically the old account is simply abandoned and the new account simply identifies itself as a successor account to the old one. Admittedly I am not totally familiar with the usurpation process but as I understand it is only done when someone wishes to use a long inactive username, not switch accounts. I am not 100% certain, though, so feel free to make a request. 331dot (talk) 16:21, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alee 04:55, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

I don't do any work there so I prefer to let those familiar with that page work on it. 331dot (talk) 07:41, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alee 10:07, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

I'm not certain, but I think so. 331dot (talk) 11:29, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message. I am not an expert of wikipedia.

Someone else created my page both in English and Italian. I was not aware of that.

Then I uploaded some information, always paying attention not to overdue it. I hope this is correct.

Please, let me know. Thanks,

Massimo Guiggiani Guiggiani (talk) 11:06, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 11:08, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Guiggiani I apologize for not knowing how to technically reply. Of course it is not "my page", but "about me". — Preceding undated comment added 11:36, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)  Done SQL^{Query me!} 16:43, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just published the page but from User:Vegan4theAnimals/sandbox to "Tamerlaine Sanctuary and Preserve" and submit it for review. Can you help? Is this the appropriate way to respond to you?

Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vegan4theAnimals (talk • contribs) 17:28, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

new user tutorial

which will help you learn more about Wikipedia.

If you are associated with this organization, please review

paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 17:42, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

However - and please accept this in the spirit of offering you something to chuckle about - when I see people say "writing a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia" I think "well, except running for admin if you have less than X edits in Y months (where X and Y are small numbers)" or "except running for ARBCOM if you've ticked off a significant number of people in your tenure here" and of course "except being a frequent-spamming spam-only account and avoid getting blocked" all of which are nigh-impossible, as they should be - well, the last one definitely should be, I'm willing to make case-by-case exceptions for the first two. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 19:49, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see the spirit you intend. Thanks. 331dot (talk) 21:00, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 331dot, can this edit be removed from public view? Ashleyyoursmile! 09:28, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. 331dot (talk) 09:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And this one please? The IP keeps adding it continuously to different pages. Sorry to bother you. Ashleyyoursmile! 09:31, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Looks like someone blocked the IP. 331dot (talk) 09:40, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Ashleyyoursmile! 09:40, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		you have a lot of effort so here u go! talk) 15:42, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply ]

Valentine Greets!!!

Hello 331dot, love is the language of hearts and is the feeling that joins two souls and brings two hearts together in a bond. Taking love to the level of Wikipedia, spread the WikiLove by wishing each other Happy Valentine's Day, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm love on the eve, Happy editing, D💘ggy54321 (xoxo😘) 03:53, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Valentine Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

I apologize if I'm on the wrong page as I was told to go to the TALK page for discussion about my MSNBC edit. I worked at Microsoft for several years and it's just plain obvious that it's a left wing news network. Wikipedia gets away with calling OANN a "far right" news organization and I searched and couldn't find good sourcing for that declaration.

It appears that Wikipedia is then just the snopes of the "encyclopedia" world.

The first paragraph on climate change in wikipedia says: Climate change includes both global warming driven by human emissions of greenhouse gases, and the resulting large-scale shifts in weather patterns. Though there have been previous periods of climatic change, since the mid-20th century, humans have had unprecedented impact on Earth's climate system and caused change on a global scale.[2]"

There is NO statistical proof of this statement. I am a mathematician/statistician (not dependent on grant money for my existence) and I know how to do random studies and I know that the conclusions on climate change currently depend on modifying the input data AND then modifying the output data to support the "climate change" narrative. It's implicit that "climate change" is "settled science". Science is theory and thus is challenged all of the time and settled science is an oxymoron.

It appears that bias has seeped into wikipedia and thus its not a useful source of real information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JXschw (talk • contribs) 03:55, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

reliable sources

state about a subject. If you have such sources that call MSNBC "left wing", please offer them. The addition of "liberal" or "left wing" has been discussed previously without any such sources being offered, but that can change at any time, so if it has, please bring it up.

I would point out that Wikipedia does not claim to be free of bias. Everything has biases, including you and me. Any bias in independent reliable sources will be reflected in Wikipedia. What Wikipedia does is present the sources to readers so they can evaluate and judge them for themselves as to bias or other factors. Wikipedia

Wikipedia is not a reliable source. If you have evaluated the sources in articles and disagree with them, that is completely fine. 331dot (talk) 07:42, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Dear Editor, I have realized that my page "Natural Quantum Communication" has been deleted because of possibly misunderstanding or lack of info. Because this idea is already proven and supported by a Journal paper. (I suggest to read that paper to realize its importance as below) https://dx.doi.org/10.1117/1.OE.59.3.033102 The other reason is, there is no evidence of any name or institution in the text exposed to readers. That means I am making emphasis on its content and importance rather than any personal or institutional popularity.

Thanks Dr. Orun — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orunab (talk • contribs) 18:28, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 331dot! I just wanted to ask a question about Hippo43's unblock appeal. Also, feel free to correct me if I misinterpret anything . It was mentioned that in regards to Hippo43's unblock appeal that you "would want to see [Hippo43] commit to [reporting to the BLP noticeboard] to consider unblocking [Hippo43], instead of relying on the [BLP] exemption." If Hippo43 were to make such a commitment now, do you think they could get a reduced block or something like that? Thank you for your consideration! Tyrone Madera (talk) 20:45, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am curious as to what your interest in their situation is. 331dot (talk) 20:50, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was involved in the talk page discussion surrounding Filipe Nyusi. Tyrone Madera (talk) 20:54, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if they make another unblock request, I think that would be a positive step if it included such a commitment. 331dot (talk) 21:00, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So—just to clarify—it would be beneficial, but nothing specific? Tyrone Madera (talk) 21:30, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If they make another request, it will be reviewed by someone else, so it's out of my hands now, and I don't want to make guarantees for someone else. 331dot (talk) 21:34, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that makes sense. (edit) Are verdicts final or can they be modified by the issuer? Tyrone Madera (talk) 21:48, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't given a verdict so much as I've given my opinion. Ideally, Hippo43 should make another unblock request, for someone else to review- but they haven't even responded to my decline. 331dot (talk) 22:52, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Thanks for answering my questions Tyrone Madera (talk) 23:26, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 331dot. You unblocked KKI at Cityplaza but then I see that the account Cpkki has also been editing Cityplaza. I suspect it was created when the first account was blocked, as a means to evade it. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:42, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's not evasion since it was only a soft block(permitting the creation of an account); they should have just stuck with that account instead of requesting unblock. It might be another employee. 331dot (talk) 17:55, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You say, "You are also still arguing process and not the merits, which is an indicator you are the target."

What a smug comment. I argued the merits, and made a few comments about the process too — mainly to point out that your actions were contrary to the WP guidelines! But some people just see what they want to see. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

My assessment? You still refused to engage with my arguments on the merits, and now you can feel free to guess what I think that is "an indicator" of.

So, anyway, I look forward to seeing the repercussions for you that should be incurred as a consequence of disrespect for the WP guidelines related to Blocking IP ranges.

—DIV (1.129.106.87 (talk) 03:23, 20 February 2021 (UTC))[reply]

Another example of your refusal to engage. —DIV (1.129.106.87 (talk) 03:27, 20 February 2021 (UTC))[reply]

I don't see how engaging with you is evidence of the opposite, but okay. I don't even recall this message which was over a year ago. I didn't issue the block so if you have an issue with IP range blocks you should bring that to the appropriate noticeboard. I told you at the time a simple way to alleviate it if you were not responsible for the activity that led to the block. As the IP or IP range you are using is no longer blocked, you are now free to edit. 331dot (talk) 09:49, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #40287 Have you anything further to add? I'm inclined to decline, but I did before already. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:36, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I declined. 331dot (talk) 20:56, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that Ledboots19 is editing at the Help Desk under an IP account, which is block evasion. See Wikipedia:Help_desk#Content_monitor_dispute_leading_to_a_dubious_act I'm not sure where to report this, so hoping you can help. Thanks. RudolfRed (talk) 23:07, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was already taken care of. Probably

WP:ANI is a good place to report that sort of thing. 331dot (talk) 23:08, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

FWIW, Ledboots19 isn't currently blocked. SQL^{Query me!} 23:08, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SQL So perhaps their password was indeed exposed but they are trying to blame me for it? 331dot (talk) 23:12, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, just looks like trolling in my opinion. SQL^{Query me!} 23:24, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the replies. RudolfRed (talk) 23:46, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Well, you're making difficult decisions every day, you're possibly one of the best admins to ever grace the land of wikipedia. EGL1234 (talk) 05:42, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 331dot,
I saw you reverted my edit on the Kamala Harris article. Would something like Kamala Devi Emhoff (nee Harris) work? This is the convention for articles like Jill Biden, Michelle Obama, and Laura Bush. Is there an exception for this particular person? Do women choose what name they like to be called? Your thoughts are appreciated. Interstellarity (talk) 17:12, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interstellarity I've never seen a RS that she took Emhoff's name, even only legally. 331dot (talk) 17:17, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To revisit my hasty reply, the first ladies you mention all took their husband's names. That's becoming less common these days. Vice President Harris was sworn in as Kamala Devi Harris, she's run her campaigns under the name Harris, and appeared in court as a prosecutor with that name. If she took her husband's last name, even only legally, I haven't seen a source for that. If she did take his name legally and there was a source for it, your edit would be correct. 331dot (talk) 07:11, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for a better explanation of your reverts. It helped clarify your actions and the revert. Interstellarity (talk) 13:33, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Can you please provide an explanation for the removal of my MSNBC edit? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmason4 (talk • contribs) 15:02, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dmason4 The explanation is that it needs to be discussed on the talk page, because how to characterize MSNBC(if at all) is contentious and has been debated before with no consensus. I doubt you will get consensus to characterize it as "radical left wing" based on one source, but it needs to be hashed out there. If you have multiple sources calling it that, please offer them. 331dot (talk) 15:44, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

edit warring over it will lead to you being blocked. 331dot (talk) 15:47, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

331dot Why are we able to classify Fox News and Newsmax as right-wing and conservative, but we cannot classify CBS and MSNBC as left wing or liberal even though it is blatantly obvious (as with Fox News and Newsmax).

does not give equal time to all points of view or equal treatment to all articles in a given subject area. It depends on the sources. 331dot (talk) 16:07, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

331dot Sources as follows: https://libguides.com.edu/c.php?g=649909&p=4556556

https://www.journalism.org/2020/01/24/americans-are-divided-by-party-in-the-sources-they-turn-to-for-political-news/

I don't need the sources, please offer them at Talk:MSNBC so all editors that follow that page can see them. 331dot (talk) 16:14, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, this user is doing the same thing at CBS, so, there is a pattern establishing. ValarianB (talk) 16:21, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 331dot, Steve Joker is Evlekis. Could you please revoke TPA? Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 09:58, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, could you do that again - Cabayi accidentally restored TPA when changing the block reason. Apologies for the disruption. Pahunkat (talk) 10:04, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey 331dot. Hope your doing well. I just wanted to ask if you could revoke TPA for the long user starting with "There is currently no article ... one day"? It would help since the user is

I've said that they will have one more chance, and I will hold to that. We will see what happens. 331dot (talk) 11:37, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks mate :)

talk) 00:21, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

@

talk) 11:33, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

There is an SPI about the matter. They haven't misused their talk page, at least not yet, and their first account(if it's them) was only soft blocked, permitting them to create a new account. If they don't get the message, the blocks may get stronger. 331dot (talk) 11:38, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see.

talk) 11:44, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

It appears you judge very hasty and do not want to have a constructive discussion on this subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SharpSeaHorse (talk • contribs) 15:53, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SharpSeaHorse I'm happy to discuss it with you here, if you wish. Have you read my message to you at the AFC Help Desk? 331dot (talk) 15:56, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As for your statement "there are many companies listed"; Wikipedia is not a place to list companies or for companies to "list" themselves. Wikipedia is not a database of information, but an encyclopedia. Not every company merits a Wikipedia article, even in the same field. See

other stuff exists; each article is judged on its own merits. As there are over 6 million articles and only thousands of editors to monitor them, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected; we can only address what we know about. If you'd like to pitch in and help, you can point out some of these other articles that may be inappropriate. 331dot (talk) 15:59, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello 331dot, can Cd159298323 be blocked as soon as possible? Block evasion of LTA Evlekis. Thank you. --Ashleyyoursmile! 09:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done, looks like someone got it globally too. 331dot (talk) 10:00, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. :) Ashleyyoursmile! 10:04, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for a redaction of personal info! CiaPan (talk) 14:46, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A revision at the sandbox was made containing the bee movie script here. - GoatLordServant^{(Talk - Contribs)} 16:32, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! - GoatLordServant^{(Talk - Contribs)} 16:34, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).

Administrator changes

TJMSmith

Boing! said Zebedee • Hiberniantears • Lear's Fool • Only • WGFinley

Interface administrator changes

AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is open that proposes a process for the community to revoke administrative permissions. This follows a 2019 RfC in favor of creating one such a policy.
• A
  subcriterion a
  , which covers immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
• A request for comment seeks to grant page movers the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target. The full proposal is at Wikipedia:Page mover/delete-redirect.
• A
  request for comment
  asks if sysops may place the General sanctions/Coronavirus disease 2019 editnotice template on pages in scope that do not have page-specific sanctions?
• There is a
  protection
  .

Technical news

• When blocking an IPv6 address with
  just block the /64
  range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
• When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at
  WP:RfPP
  , and even link to the specific revision.
• There have been
  Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322
  ).

Arbitration

• By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people. Sanctions issued under GamerGate are now considered Gender and sexuality sanctions.
• The Kurds and Kurdistan case was closed, authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2021 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AmandaNP, Operator873, Stanglavine, Teles, and Wiki13.

See [4]. Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 20:46, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! As

You’re not agreeing to what I’m editing. In fact, my edits were constructive since I added pictures. So what? You think I’m a vandal? That’s bad. Red Flavor (talk) 05:47, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As what I said in User talk:Andrewgprout in "Complain of adding or removed pictures of Airlines?", I also realize why you added more aircraft pictures, it's too disruptive and also messed up.. like other airport pages. Corner2002 (talk) 06:22, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I'm not gonna involved to this, I'm stress here because of our class. And, also please stop adding back pictures. If someone says remove and don't put it back, don't put it back. Thank you! Corner2002 (talk) 06:24, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.

Could you please review my draft: "Chapter One: The Hellfire Club"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.199.189.161 (talk) 12:45, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have submitted it for review and it is pending. If I reviewed drafts at users' request, that's all I would be doing once users could figure out they could bypass the process. Wikipedia

has no deadlines so there is no sense of urgency as far as we are concerned. If you truly feel that you can write acceptable articles(it's more challenging than it might appear to be) you should create an account which would eventually allow you to directly create articles(I don't advise you doing that, just noting it). 331dot (talk) 12:51, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Cheers mate, I was just wondering if it is pending, if you could be the person to review it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.199.189.161 (talk) 12:55, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've answered that question above. You have asked at the Teahouse, and others may choose to help if they wish. Do you have a particular need for a speedy review? Asking users directly for a review is usually seen as jumping the line. Why should you be ahead of the other 4,000 plus drafts awaiting review? 331dot (talk) 13:08, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

About the other 4,000 drafts; fair enough. I just want a speedy review so I can get feedback on how to make my draft better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.199.189.161 (talk) 13:57, 3 March 2021 (UTC) 146.199.189.161 (talk) 14:11, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can get and implement feedback even without a formal review. That's what the Teahouse and other Help forums are for. You may edit your draft at any time even while it is pending. 331dot (talk) 14:31, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If ANYONE would like to review my draft here is the link:

I am world-renown and utterly respected. I don't need random people who have no clue of who I am or what I've accomplished writing freely about me. Especially as a black woman. There is a horrible, history of people thinking we exist for their entertainment or gossip. You have a horrible conception of who I am. I am the leader of the modern-day trans movement and I changed the world without wikipedia. Delete this account today sweetie! Delete my wikipedia!

When's the soonest you can do this baby?

KOKUMO The Queen Of Queer Soul Founder & CEO Of Born Worthy Records

vanishing

.

I have already answered your question regarding the article about you. If you wish to propose additions or changes to the article about you, you may make a formal

a notable person, which is different than the more general use of the term, a deletion discussion can be started. Those are your options. 331dot (talk) 12:50, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

This [5] can be read as a request to delete the article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:14, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gråbergs Gråa Sång I'm hesitant to give in to anger, threats and accusations of racism/sexism, but there seems to be enough sources to require a deletion discussion, maybe? 331dot (talk) 13:21, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would an attempted

WP:PROD be ok? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:30, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

We could try it, I guess. I will shortly be leaving my computer so if you wish to, go ahead, and we can both just keep an eye on it. 331dot (talk) 13:33, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And done. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:42, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I threatened no one! I'm a black woman who stated what she needed and as usual white men refused to listen to hear me or anyone but a white man or woman for that matter. Delete my account and stop harassing me and speaking on my brand! Inform me when my Wikipedia page has been deleted. I will be creating a website, entitled, KOKUMO, The Queen Of Queer Soul and don't need any of your racist old white men to help me change the world again. I don't need any of you racist white people.

KOKUMO The Queen Of Queer Soul Founder & CEO Of Born Worthy Records KOKUMOTheQueenOfQueerSoul (talk) 14:19, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think anyone is objecting to deleting the article at this point. And I don't think anyone has refused to listen to you. As you know, it's not possible to delete an account and even if it were, I'm not sure how anyone would then notify you that the article had been deleted? --Paul ❬talk❭ 14:29, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

KOKUMOTheQueenOfQueerSoul I work to treat every human being here with dignity and respect, and I don't think that I've done differently with you. Insofar as you are a human I am not concerned with your race, gender, or sexuality. Don't assume that the people on the other end of the computer are old white men, Wikipedia users are all over the world and of all races and genders. No one has refused to listen to you; you don't like the answers you've been given. Accounts cannot be deleted, for technical and legal reasons. 331dot (talk) 23:13, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. I only recently had the wiki page approved and used that help site earlier. I'll switch. I tried seeing if I could reply to you on the note you left, but don't see how to do that. Barrydfloyd (talk) 16:57, 5 March 2021 (UTC)BarryDFloyd[reply]