User talk:JustAMuggle

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

JustAMuggle (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

What's "block evasion"? How did I "intentionally evade a block"? What did I do? Was this put here by mistake? Was I blocked by mistake? All I do is improve Wikipedia by fixing typos and grammar and adding conversions and links on the pages I'm reading... I read the blocking/evasion section and the Guide to Appealing Blocks, and I haven't violated any of the policies listed. I haven't done any vandalizing or anything. I only have one account, and I'm not reverting other people's edits. If I'm somehow doing anything wrong, just let me know and I'll stop doing it, but I was given no previous warning or indication. The last interaction I had with Pocketthis was in September 2014, when we discussed comma usage on the Mojave Desert page, but it says when I try to edit a page that I evaded blocks by that user? Can you help me out, Ad Orientem? I legit have no idea what is going on or what could have caused this, and I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to how Wikipedia works beyond editing pages, so I'm not even sure I'm drafting this response correctly or in the right place. JustAMuggle (talk) 21:46, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Blocked in error. See below. Ad Orientem (talk) 22:22, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As I am reading this your account was created by Pocketthis. At least that is what it looks like to me. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:58, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, goodness, no! Thank you for the explanation. Pocketthis simply created my user page, not my account. This is explained here on my user talk page: "Also, I created your user page so your name will appear blue." My response was "Thanks for creating my user page! I always thought it was just red because it was my own." Because truly, I barely know what I'm doing! I'm sure Pocketthis would be happy to confirm, but I'm not sure they will see this based on the message at the top of their talk page. JustAMuggle (talk) 22:06, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok that looks like like a pretty solid alibi. I will unblock you directly and I wuill put blocked in error in the unblock summary so no one will hold it against you. Just as an FYI and out of an abundance of caution I am going to ask for a check user to double check, but this does look good to me. You will be unblocked shortly. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:12, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks so much for your help! I'm happy to answer any other questions that would help with the investigation, and please do feel free to double check. Just let me know if there's anything else I can do! Is there a way I can make sure this doesn't happen again in the future? Or will I always be suspect because another user created my page for me? JustAMuggle (talk) 22:16, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have unblocked you. I apologize for the error. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:20, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Magic Eightball and confirm the lack of any connection between the accounts? Thanks... -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:20, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I don't think there is any chance that this will happen again. But you should remove the one edit on your user page as that was what triggered this. But You will be fine and I don't think anyone will hold your block against you as I noted the block was in error. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:33, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ad Orientem: I'm not sure that a check is justified in these circumstances, but the question is moot if you're talking about Pocketthis because that account is  Stale. (You forgot to sign above.)--Bbb23 (talk) 22:30, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. That works for me. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:33, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		For your quiet but tireless work tidying up articles. Ad Orientem (talk) 16:45, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JustAMuggle. 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

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]

I don't have the time to go through each and every one of your mistakes, but most of your edits were wrong. (I do concur that "nonprofit" is the correct spelling, though.) Here are a few illustrative ones:

"Later, Garfield also credited Ordway with coming up with the general idea of prepayment for industrial healthcare, and explained that he did not know much at the time about other similar

In formal written English, especially American English, U.S. is still far more common in American newspapers of record and major newsmagazines, not US. British English began to drop the periods about four or five decades ago.

There has been a trend towards eliding "health care" to "healthcare" for about 30 years. For example, Modern Healthcare magazine.

"Has faced", the current wording, is more precise than "received." "Received" is what happens when one submits criticism through a Web form directly to a business's customer service department. WP generally doesn't cover such private criticism because that's what Yelp is for. "Has faced" more accurately describes the situation here: KP has faced public criticism. The connotation of "has faced" is more confrontational than "received," which is what makes it the better word choice under the circumstances. All experienced writers always check for appropriate connotation and denotation when choosing words.

"Then" when used as an adjective to refer to the holder of a position at a previous point in time is usually linked to the title of the position by a hyphen. --Coolcaesar (talk) 21:06, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well. I learned something today. Turns out there has been a discussion elsewhere about the "then-president" issue which links to Google Ngram Viewer which is based on actual texts ingested by Google for the Google Books project. So "then president" is historically and currently the much more common usage. I stand corrected and I apologize for my presumptuousness.

Turns out "health care" is more common too, but my intuition was correct in the sense that "health care" peaked in 1994 and is slowly losing ground to "healthcare." This is a closer call and obviously I prefer the more concise usage, but at this point I won't object if you want to switch the KP article over to "health care."

I see what you mean about removing the extra "has" in "has faced" and do not object to that deletion.

The last major issue I had with your edits was the deletion of two usages of "of", which I felt made the article unduly concise. The more I think about it, the second deletion is tolerable, but I am still irritated by the deletion of "of" so "all of their" becomes "all their," because the result is the stacking of multiple modifiers on the noun "funding." That's probably why Ngram Viewer shows that the phrase with an of is more common. --Coolcaesar (talk) 22:43, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The one remaining concern I have is that the MOS actually does not express a preference on the U.S./US issue and instead stresses only internal consistency. There have been a great many debates over the years over this and it has always been a stalemate between the British English writers who like US and the American English writers who were taught to use "U.S." at the college and graduate/professional level. (At the high school level, I will readily concede that many teachers are lenient and allow both, which is why I wasn't clear myself on the issue until my college years.) I'm going to revert my revert of your edit now. As long as you keep U.S., I think we're fine for now. --Coolcaesar (talk) 23:09, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JustAMuggle! I noticed that you made an edit to Patellar tendon, removing a comma. Would you mind explaining why? Thanks! Bibeyjj (talk) 22:01, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've seen some of your Middle-earth article edits, and it seems to me that you have an approach to punctuation that simply doesn't work for the style of British English which he project uses. I've accordingly made some reverts and hope not to have to keep on doing so. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:36, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You've just done that again at Númenor‎. Please understand and accept that British punctuation is just not the same as that of other varieties; or perhaps, that my school in my era taught something other than your variety. I see from the item below that at least one other editor is becoming ruffled by your eagerness to change Wikipedia's language settings; repunctuating correct (and extremely carefully-written, and formally-reviewed) British punctuation for Middle-earth articles amounts to much the same thing. Please stop. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:12, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please stop, I've explained to you repeatedly that you are breaking the articles' British diction and flow, and introducing inappropriate diction that simply doesn't work in the context. I have today reverted almost all your Middle-earth edits as inapposite or in a few instances demonstrably wrong. Your editing is verging on disruptive. I would be really grateful if you could stop now before this escalates. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:18, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can visit the help desk. Thank you. David J Johnson (talk) 21:31, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

David J Johnson: The same is happening on Middle-earth articles, which are obviously in British English. If this continues then action will have to be taken. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:21, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chiswick Chap: I've been disappointed to see all the work I've been putting into Middle-earth articles reverted because as far as I'm aware, none of my edits have changed British English to American English. I'm a professional copy editor for an American publication, but I've been working with writers from a variety of English-speaking countries for about a decade, so I'd like to think I recognize the difference between American and British English.

Know that all my edits are in good faith, and I am actually careful to maintain British English in my copy editing on Wikipedia. I was made aware of the standards in

2001: A Space Odyssey

were a result of my not realizing that the film was a joint production between the US and the UK, oops).

I'm always open to learning, though, and I would appreciate any specific examples of my mistaken American English you can point out.

Thank you very much for replying. I know all the edits were in good faith. My edit comments this year have pointed out various errors. However, the immediate issue is actually punctuation. All the Middle-earth articles have commas where an English editor would pause minutely for a quick breath, as with the two commas in "where the Fellowship disembarked and was then broken, with the capture of Merry and Pippin, and the death of Boromir"; it is apparent that American editors would read, and breathe, differently. This is quite a subtle matter, and not terribly easy to explain in terms of rules, though I'm sure someone out there has given it a go. Perhaps these two commas mark out a description in apposition, giving a little more detail on the preceding phrase; or perhaps not. Anyway, that's just one instance. Since over 100 of the Middle-earth articles have reached Good Article status, shepherded through the process by British hands, rearranging the commas must be seen as a risky manoeuvre (maneuver?). All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:57, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello, I'm CastJared. I noticed that you recently made an edit to The Last of Us in which your edit summary did not appear to describe the change you made. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. CastJared (talk) 04:51, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Do you have a personal and/or professional relationship with MuggleNet or anyone affiliated with it? You seem to imply as much in your edit summaries. If so, this COI should have been disclosed. —Ganesha811 (talk) 21:23, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mandy Hampton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The St. Petersburg Times.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:36, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:MuggleNet Fan Fiction Banner.png. 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) 02:37, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you choose the featured snippet on Google showing my writing that you edited on the Johnston tornado in Rhode Island this morning? Because i edited it to correct some info, but it still shows the same snippet. C0smoNauticalMile (talk) 15:34, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, it updated after 10 minutes or so. C0smoNauticalMile (talk) 15:35, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 2023 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]