User talk:Therapyisgood/Archive 2

Hello, Therapyisgood,

Please pace your nominations at AFD and do not do any mass-nominations, especially on articles on similar subjects. It puts an undue strain on editors who want to do their due diligence and look for sources that might make the difference between an article being kept or deleted. It only takes seconds to nominate a page for deletion but editors can spend hours searching for reliable sources. There is no urgent need to delete articles on non-notable subjects so please pace out your nominations so you don't overwhelm the system. Many thanks for your contributions! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:37, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: if I recall correctly there was an RFC somewhere that on this very topic. Did that end up limiting the number of AFD noms a user could submit at once, or not? If not, I have not done anything against policy. I do not plan on nominating less for AFD in the future if there's no policy against it. Therapyisgood (talk) 05:46, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't slow your roll on these dubious AfD noms, I can assure you that you will end up at ANI sooner or later. And when you do, the uncollaborative spirit conveyed in the above comment will do you no favors. Liz gave several good reasons why you shouldn't do mass nominations, and you didn't acknowledge a single one of those reasons. Similarly, you simply hauled me up at deletion review without the courtesy contact that is suggested in the instructions. And then there was the revert w/o response of Beanie's comment. Thus far, you are batting .000 at working well with others. Like a bull in a china shop, you have rushed into a content area that you clearly do not understand and created a mess for others to clean up. And as we are trying to clean it up, you are boldly proclaiming that we have no right to prevent you from making more messes tomorrow. All things considered, Liz's message was quite charitable, and I suggest you take it to heart.

LEPRICAVARK (talk) 06:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

You have recently made edits related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. This is a standard message to inform you that articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. ––FormalDude (talk) 01:02, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:55, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 2 May 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rumrich spy case, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that at the trial of the Rumrich spy case, US Army deserter Guenther Rumrich stated he was instructed to determine how many US soldiers were based on the country's east coast? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rumrich spy case. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Rumrich spy case), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

-- RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 8,044 views (670.3 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of May 2023 – nice work!

this is inappropriate and uncalled for. I encourage you to delete it. Jclemens (talk) 06:49, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 May 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pacifying the Homeland, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 2019 book Pacifying the Homeland was compared to an ice-cold shower for individuals acclimatized to mass surveillance in the US due to its pervasiveness in daily life? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pacifying the Homeland. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Pacifying the Homeland), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Aoidh (talk) 00:03, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 5 June 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Jessie Maple, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. —Bagumba (talk) 16:09, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article

The article The Good News Club: The Christian Right's Stealth Assault on America's Children you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Good News Club: The Christian Right's Stealth Assault on America's Children for comments about the article, and Talk:The Good News Club: The Christian Right's Stealth Assault on America's Children/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of 1TWO3Writer -- 1TWO3Writer (talk) 15:01, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here .
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've

criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of 1TWO3Writer -- 1TWO3Writer (talk) 11:42, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply

The article

This is not acceptable. Please comment on the content, not fellow editors. As somebody who has been made redundant and forced through no fault of my own to sign on to the (as was) jobseekers allowance program, let me tell you that "not having a real job" can be soul-destroying. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:25, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:33, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

---

Request reason:

It's my off day and I'd like to respond to the thread at ANI about me which was started while I was blocked. I am sorry for trolling. Most of the block has been served and some users were questioning how harsh it was in the first place. Again I am sorry and just want to move on. Thank you. Therapyisgood (talk) 12:35 pm, Today (UTC−7)

Accept reason:

You have been unblocked. Please note the concerns by past editors regarding civility and I encourage you to participate in the AN/I discussion.

« Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:25, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

I am sorry that you caught a block for this. I have seen your work and I know that you are not a troll. I am glad you were able to stand up and ivote knowing that the long knives would come out. I am powerless to unblock you but I believe that @Rosguill: should act on their own to unblock you as I believe it is excessive. Lightburst (talk) 18:52, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

LB, I get your point, but being a troll is not the same as engaging in behavior that appears to be trolling. I honestly wondered what TIG was thinking, making a personal attack basically out of the blue because someone had objected to their oppose? I mean, why? It's one thing to make an oppose in an RfA that many others think is wrongheaded. It's completely another to then make personal attacks in response to objections to that oppose. And as was pointed out, it wasn't even the first very similar personal attack made today. TIG, I feel like I need to ask if there's something going on? Valereee (talk) 19:40, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@

WP:WHYBLOCK which outlines a reason to block: persistent or severe personal attacks - this was neither persistent nor severe. Lightburst (talk) 20:45, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Maybe we take this somewhere else? I feel kind of bad having it here. Valereee (talk) 21:28, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:51, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Mark Baldwin (baseball) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mark Baldwin (baseball) for comments about the article, and Talk:Mark Baldwin (baseball)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of 1TWO3Writer -- 1TWO3Writer (talk) 08:02, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per the discussion on ANI, you are banned for one year from interacting with BeanieFan11. Besides the examples given in

Regarding Special:Diff/1173530749, please address your comments to actions, not to people. RoySmith (talk) 01:43, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've

criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of The Blue Rider -- The Blue Rider (talk) 12:20, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply

The article

Congratulations, Therapyisgood! The article you nominated, Mark Baldwin (baseball), has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 October 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Smalltime, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Russell Shorto's mobster grandfather was described by one reviewer as the "holy trinity of a reprobate—a drunk, a philanderer, and a cheat" in the 2021 family memoir Smalltime? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Smalltime. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Smalltime), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. You are mentioned here so I am pinging you Lightburst (talk) 15:29, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Patricia Beer you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Patricia Beer for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of The Blue Rider -- The Blue Rider (talk) 21:21, 7 November 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) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

@Dank: I have no problem with that or any other of my FAs running at any date you or anyone else would like. No need to ask in the future. Therapyisgood (talk) 15:36, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. - Dank (push to talk) 17:08, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]