User talk:Iiii I I I

☆ Save On Wikipedia ↗

regarding your marking edits as vandalism on List of Law & Order: UK episodes

Regarding your edit earlier today to List of Law & Order: UK episodes, there has been some issue with summaries being copied from elsewhere. It is somewhat complicated by only parts of each summary being direct copy & paste into the article. The edits that you marked as vandalism removed a summary which contains some phrasing that is an exact match to the summary from cast member Bradley Walsh's site . I only went looking into it when the user who removed it disputed your calling the removal vandalism. Unlike with most episode lists Law & Order | UK is not so easy to pick out wikipedia:copyright violations due to the length of the summaries, the character limit in googling a phrase, and the many international broadcasters which sometimes each have their own summary on their respective websites, in addition to the typical IMDb, tv.com, et al.
In general it is good practice to look into a claim of copyright violation before simply reverting an edit and potentially restoring a copyright violation. If you restore a copyright violation you then are held accountable for it being in the article. Persistent insertion of copyright violations can get you blocked. Be careful. delirious & lost ☯ ~hugs~ 17:25, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

follow-up to response on my talk page: I saw you are an admin on a wikia site so i assumed you know the technical side of wikis but maybe didn't know the policies here. If you want to read it you can see my welcome message at user:deliriousandlost/welcome. Normally it would be like the header on a talk page but you already have one. :P It has links to basic policies and cookies and more ~hugs~ delirious & lost ☯ ~hugs~ 18:46, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Please stop

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to WP:BLPN, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. 184.59.23.225 (talk) 02:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi

Thanks for this. A Macedonian (talk) 15:08, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Re: hai

hai thar, why do you not use the same name on Wikipedia as you use on Wikia? ZamorakO o (talk) 17:20, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Aww mans. :c ZamorakO o (talk) 17:23, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Bully (video game)

Please stop reverting me. In addition to denying consensus, you are identifying my good faith edits as vandalism, which is misuse of Twinkle and has been known to cause Wikipedia to disallow users the privilege to use it. 108.15.29.31 (talk) 20:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry if that came across harsh, I wasn't trying to be a jerk, but I have seen it happen. Wikipedia revokes rollback and script access at the drop of a hat. I used to edit with a username and it happened to me (among many others). 108.15.29.31 (talk) 20:16, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

On your marking of edits as vandalism on Valencian

Please, read policies on Vandalism before tagging as such any modification, and not giving a proprer explanation. Note that edits on the article Valencian were made in good faith, as the massive deletion of information was due to moving such information to a new specific article Valencian language controversy, while an small abstract and reference was left in the article. Also note that, as a result of your revertion, information has been lost, ongoing work on restructure of the article has gone down the drain, and text now makes no sense. If desired, please answer in Valencian talkpage. User: IeXrivâ 20:16, 29 November 2010

Thanks for your quick answer. Can't undo your modification, as there is a new one after yours. I'll see how to fix it. Anyway, I consider that correcting vandalism is relevant task and thank you for your labor in this sense. Regards. User: IeXrivâ 23:32, 29 November 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by IeXrivâ (talk • contribs)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Artok

Hello AznBurger. I am just letting you know that I deleted Artok, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 04:13, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Twinkle not recognising user talk page redirects

I've undone this edit of yours. The message should have been placed on the target of the redirect instead. I've asked at the Village Pump (technical) if Twinkle can be fixed to stop this happening again. Best wishes, DuncanHill (talk) 14:54, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

hai

do i no u? Ajraddatz (Talk) 16:07, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

im teh person who eats teh burgrs Ajraddatz (Talk) 23:46, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
american@@@ im nawt ameirencan Ajraddatz (Talk) 03:47, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
im teh cannandaian aznburgr eatr Ajraddatz (Talk) 18:18, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
*nom nom nom* Ajraddatz (Talk) 20:42, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

i c u

Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:05, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Ask for it. Just say that you're a sysop on rswiki, and know how to use it. Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:08, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
thar Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:17, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

AMG

I see a nub, oh wait this isn't Ajr's page. Sentra246 (talk) 02:49, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

nou Ajraddatz (Talk) 02:51, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Ya, I know, he's as much of a sockpuppet as ajr is cool. Sentra246 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:53, 20 February 2011 (UTC).

nou nou nou nou nou im pro Ajraddatz (Talk) 02:56, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:07, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

wat

hai thar wat do i do here Chess1242 (talk) 16:13, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

February 2011

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Ra: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit was inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Ben Ben (talk) 19:31, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your answer on my talk page. I prefer holding a talk on the page where it was started. Have seen on your user page you are using Twinkle. Twinkle has most of the uw-templates build in, just click on the "warn"-title when you are on a user talk page.--Ben Ben (talk) 19:44, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
lol way to bite the nub Ajraddatz (Talk) 19:45, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
be quiet, ajr >:( --AznBurger (talk) 19:46, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
yes maam Ajraddatz (Talk) 19:49, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Most Important

Why are you stalking me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.227.110.46 (talk) 03:58, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Re:Re:Most Important

It's k. :3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.227.110.46 (talk) 04:00, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii i found yu!

HAI IIII_I_I_I HAO R YU @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Sactage Talk 14:21, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Warning users

Hi, I've noticed that you have a fair amount of good reverts to your name but very few (if any) warnings issued to vandals. I just wondered why you don't follow through with a warning? Alex J Fox (Talk) (Contribs) 14:25, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

November 2016

Information icon I noticed that a message you recently left to 2600:387:B:7:0:0:0:C3 may have been unduly harsh for a newcomer. Please remember not to bite the newcomers. If you see someone make a common mistake, try to politely point out what they did wrong and how to correct it. Remember to assume good faith. They did not vandalise, they were simply (but misguidedly) trying to apply NPOV. Thanks. NOTNOTABLE (talk) 19:20, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Tennis Integrity Unit logo.svg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 18:02, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Timeless Newsletter • Issue 4

Newsletter • April 2019

Welcome to the fourth issue of the Timeless newsletter, with a cat! Or maybe not.

Un chat qui miaule???

It's true! The angry cat, a fundamental part of Timeless, has resulted in confusion and bug reports all across the projects and phabricator. And now it shall be immortalised forever in the new, shiny Timeless logo.

Updates:

After putting off the project for three months because I got hit in the head with a flight of stairs, and then putting off the project for another two months while working out what the status of the grant was, I have now put off the project even more in order to focus on my other project for a bit. So progress lately has been a bit whims-based as a result:

Radar:

  • The French Wiktionary voted to set Timeless as their default skin, with results possibly as you might expect: I ran away and hid, and the WMF said no. A bit of discussion later and we largely agreed that all else aside, this is a bit of a branding issue, but we love the enthusiasm! Also the bug reports that inevitably come out of such a discussion. I'm still working on properly going through those.
  • Theme support is still stuck in limbo, but now we have another skinning RfC. tl;dr, we wanna replace the entire skinning system, and Skizzerz'll write a prototype later.

I will be fully resuming work on Timeless next week, or maybe the week after, depending on what madness (or illness) comes out of the Hackathon in Prague. Please come talk to me there to discuss strategy!

-— Isarra ༆ 16:51, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Timeless Newsletter • Issue 5

Newsletter • August 2019

Welcome to the fifth and final issue of the Timeless newsletter!

Progress was made. True story.

I am happy to announce that after about a year, this delightful project in which absolutely nothing has gone according to plan is coming to a close. Or at least, the grant-funded portion is. Which means we will now be resuming our regular schedule of random whims-based development, you probably won't notice any difference whatsoever unless you use MonoBook, and there's a report.

What's new from the past two months:

A lot less than we'd hoped, frankly. We:

We also wound up with:

  • Patches resulting in RelatedArticles working in MonoBook, and FlaggedRevisions showing up in Minerva, unless someone actually managed to turn that off as well. (Blame T181242.) It's possible we went a little overboard with the whole 'let's close all the tasks!' sprint.
  • An unfortunate repeated discovery that themes (the Night/Winter variants I keep insisting will happen at some point) are still pretty far off on the horizon. Um.
  • Possibly a quite a few more bugs coming your way. This month, and especially the past week, have been a bit of a mess, development-wise. While hopefully none of the worse issues make it to production, please keep the reports coming for whatever you do find and we'll get it fixed as soon as we can. Y'all've been amazing about this, and it's really appreciated.

And I guess that's that. I'm really bad at reporting, and this is a report. For the purposes of the grant, this was a requirement, but do you want me to keep trying to send these out?

-— Isarra ༆ 18:08, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Delfin (surname), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dolfin. 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) 06:09, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Shang-Chi

Hi, I appreciate you readding the info with a source, and you clearly did this via the "undo" option. That is fine, but please leave a summary such as "readd with source" in future, as having the edit summary as a simple "undid revision by IronManCap" clearly brought about some confusion and an impression that you were edit warring and reinstating unsourced info, which you were clearly not. Thanks. IronManCap (talk) 21:20, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Pennsylvania State Police fallen officers list removal

I've helped to maintain the fallen officers list on the Pennsylvania State Police page for the last several years. Just recently however, this list was completely removed with the justification of "I'm not aware of any other police department article that lists the names of all its dead for the past hundred years".

However, the following 18 other US state police agency Wikipedia pages have similar lists of their fallen officers: Tennessee Highway Patrol, Louisiana State Police, Maine State Police, South Carolina Highway Patrol, Texas Highway Patrol, New Mexico State Police, Montana Highway Patrol, Wyoming Highway Patrol, South Dakota Highway Patrol, North Dakota Highway Patrol, Connecticut State Police, Rhode Island State Police, Minnesota State Patrol, Indiana State Police, Illinois State Police, Missouri State Highway Patrol, Utah Highway Patrol, and Kansas Highway Patrol... and I only checked the statewide police agencies.

These are long-standing lists that have been on Wikipedia for years. Many of those lists go back nearly 100 years (several to the 1930's), though the only reason most don’t exceed 100 years is simply because those other agencies haven’t existed for that long yet. However the Pennsylvania State Police has. To leave all those other lists intact and arbitrarily remove ONLY the Pennsylvania State Police's memorial list is both inconsistent and nonsensical. Pikeman327 (talk) 17:24, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Accessibility issues for Florida Nav Boxes

Hi @Iiii I I I. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I truly do appreciate you reaching out, without also editing the edits I made (it's a quite time consuming process, I'm sure you're aware). I was going based off of this: https://www.whocanuse.com/?bg=ff9100&fg=333333&fs=16&fw=.

These are one of the resources that was listed on here Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility. The color scheme I have for both the background #FF9100 and the Text 333333, is accessible for most vision sets, with the exception for Cataracs, Low Vision, and Direct Sunlight. Let me know what you think would be a better hue for the background (preferably within Orange, due to the State's intrinsic connection with the [[Shades of orange|color]] and aptly named [[Orange (fruit)|fruit]]).

I was toggling around on the resource you provided: https://webaim.org/resources/contrastchecker/?fcolor=3366CC&bcolor=FF9100; I noticed that the #FFB429 passes Large Texts and Graphical Objects and User Interface Components. Let me know what you think. Freeholdman12 (talk) 02:36, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Crebilly Farm

Information icon Hello, Iiii I I I. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Crebilly Farm, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 02:06, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Removing Grooming Gangs Items for Spurious Reasons

Your insistence that White British children are not minorities in English cities is not consistent with the evidence.

Birmingham's school age population for 2023/24 is only 25.0% White British for example, compared to Pakistani at 23.8%: https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/data-tables/fast-track/01a28628-662b-440c-3e14-08dc65d12a8f

Are you employed by the UK Home Office to suppress discussion of the grooming gangs issue? I don't understand why you would repeatedly do this. 92.22.27.64 (talk) 17:46, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

I have started a section on the mention of anti-white racism in the lede at Talk:Racism_in_the_United_Kingdom#Mention_of_anti-white_racism_in_the_lead_section. PhilKnight (talk) 18:03, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Removing my writing

Stop removing my writing 2001:8003:280A:5B00:C86:7C7B:AF22:48D8 (talk) 12:55, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

joe biden.jpg Iiii I I I (talk) 21:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Noel Jeddore

You don't find this edit OK? I would've let this slide. I welcomed them, hoping that they register and change their ways from before this edit I'm referencing. Mamani1990 (talk) 00:00, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Edits

I think many of your edits were helpful here. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steve_Witkoff&diff=prev&oldid=1268715080

Others, less so. The Wall Street Journal is a high-level RS. Your deletion of the quote from them should, I would suggest, be reverted. It's certainly not puffery - if you look at MOS:Puffery. It has attribution. To a top-level RS. It's not the opinion of an editor or of a non-RS. And it's quoted, not characterized.

The fact that he carried a gun while collecting rent is reflected in lots of notable RSs, so should probably remain.

I'm frankly not sure - perhaps it's better under MOS - was there a reason to switch from U.S. to US? I think that given this is an American English article .. he's an American after all .. unless there is a good reason to change it, it was fine as it was. But let me know if that's wrong.

Otherwise, I applaud your edits. Thank you. 184.153.21.19 (talk) 05:44, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

January 2025

Information icon Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Jews in association football: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. jolielover♥talk 04:27, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Hasty revert

Hello. Avoid making hasty reverts like you did on Peshmerga. According to the constitution of Iraq, the regions are allowed to create and manage their own internal security forces, including guards of the region and not separate “armed forces” which is a exclusive federal authority. The foremost source on Iraq and its institutions is obviously the country’s constitution. If the constitution refers to the security agencies of the regions as internal security forces then that is what they are. 2001:999:68C:4651:6DF7:3DA3:DA5C:FA37 (talk) 00:37, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

It was not a hasty revert. You seemed to have missed the citation when you asked for a source in the edit summary, so I pointed it out. There are any number of places that cite the Peshmerga as a military force: Defense Studies article, the ACLED (which interestingly says "military/security"), the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the US Army. The Iraqi constitution does not specifically mention the Peshmerga. Iiii I I I (talk) 00:52, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

About this diff

Turns out I can't read, I thought the whole phrase was italicized before. Feel free to revert if you want. --Richard Yin (talk) 04:58, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

No worries, I also misread it but in a different way - I thought he had bolded the phrases instead of italicizing them. Iiii I I I (talk) 05:01, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

See you in the court

I am seriously considering consulting my lawyer regarding this matter. I will be taking steps to address the harassment and stress I've experienced over the past six nights. I will pursue all available options to hold accountable those responsible for the distress caused you brought on me. Mr. Accuracy Specialist (talk) 07:27, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Forward:
To FACT-CHECKED you and debunked your argument on me.
There are two main issues here. Firstly, regarding personal attacks: I didn't initiate the insults. Every time I made an edit, someone would revert it, even though I explained that I removed unsourced content. Despite this, others continued to edit.
Secondly, regarding disruptive edits: What's wrong with removing uncited claims? Isn't that a necessary step to ensure accuracy? I fail to see the logic in criticizing me for this. It seems that you, like the others, are failing to comprehend the importance of verifying information Mr. Accuracy Specialist (talk) 07:30, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Hello! I'm having some issues with the downstairs toilet in my house. I see you are a Master Plumber, as mentioned on your userpage - do you think you could help me diagnose the problem? Iiii I I I (talk) 07:34, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
I blocked Mr. Accuracy Specialist for this unambiguous legal threat. Iiii I I I: I briefly and unintentionally blocked you while doing this; sorry for the confusion. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:36, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
It's not a problem! Thanks for taking care of this user, although I will now need to look elsewhere for my plumbing needs Iiii I I I (talk) 08:39, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
I recommend using the upstairs toilet downstairs is now just another cupboard. 144.6.103.10 (talk) 18:12, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Why I didn't provide a reliable source for a Christopher wilder victim

I didn't provide a reliable source because I removed old sources to make room for new rooms but I don't know how to add sources but look up dnasolves.com and it should show that the victim was identified 72.2.243.103 (talk) 11:39, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Looks good to me

I refer to this edit in which you said I'm not too familiar with the move process, so let me know if I've done something wrong..

Good question. It looks good to me, and congratulations on initiating a Requested Move which, by strong consensus, improved Wikipedia.

We are all learners here. See my other-wiki page the expert and the others. And again I say, good stuff. Andrewa (talk) 08:39, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, and thank you for moving the page! Iiii I I I (talk) 08:43, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Explanation for the Removal of "Sheuly Azad" from Wikipedia’s Notable Persons List

I am writing to provide an explanation for my recent edit on the Wikipedia page for Sarail, where I removed the name Sheuly Azad from the list of notable persons. My decision was based on the following considerations:

1. Lack of Notability: Wikipedia's guidelines emphasize that individuals listed in the "Notable persons" section should have significant achievements, widespread recognition, or a lasting impact on their respective fields or communities. Sheuly Azad does not meet these criteria in any meaningful way. Her political career does not demonstrate any outstanding contributions to justify inclusion in this list.

2. Controversial Background: She was an MP under a government widely criticized for corruption and authoritarian practices. Her tenure lacked any notable achievements that positively impacted the people of Sarail or Bangladesh at large. Instead, her political career has been marred by allegations of corruption and unethical practices, which contradict the standards of notability set by Wikipedia.

3. Avoiding Bias and Misinformation: Wikipedia aims to maintain neutrality and accuracy in its content. Including her name in the list of notable persons could mislead readers into believing she has made significant contributions when, in reality, her role has been highly controversial. By removing her name, I aimed to uphold the integrity of the information presented on the page.

4. Current Public Perception: Beyond her political controversies, recent events have led to her being labeled a traitor by many. Given her loss of credibility and public standing, keeping her name on the page could be misleading and inappropriate.

I firmly believe that Wikipedia should reflect verified and neutral information, free from undue influence or political bias. If there are any concerns about my edit, I welcome further discussion based on Wikipedia’s notability and reliability guidelines.

Thank you for your time and consideration. MD RADUAN ABDULLAH ISHRAK (talk) 22:58, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

It does not matter what she has done or what you personally think about her - Sheuly Azad is notable by virtue of her Wikipedia article existing, and she was a resident of Sarail Upazila, so she belongs in the notable residents section of Sarail Upazila. I would suggest you read the guidelines on notability and neutrality instead of blindly pasting AI-generated responses. Iiii I I I (talk) 23:31, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
Thank you so much for letting me know . I am new and I am trying to contribute in Wikipedia.
I will further Remember on my mind. MD RADUAN ABDULLAH ISHRAK (talk) 23:45, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Star Rapid

information shared are not accurate and valid anymore. Please remove all mentioning about company. thank you 203.168.252.111 (talk) 04:21, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

You have not explained why the content is inaccurate or provided reliable sources to back your claims up. Iiii I I I (talk) 04:25, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Opera 11 on OS X.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Opera 11 on OS X.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free 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. Johnj1995 (talk) 01:43, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

STOP REVERTING EDITS

@Iiii I I I I see you have reverted my edits on Senapati district without requesting for reference. If you have claims my edits were wrong please show/provide your source. Also you tried banning my IP for vandalism while im trying to figure out who else share the same IP. While I understand the need to do that, why are you making unnecessary changes on your own without valid source and proofs or even starting a talk? 103.190.10.20 (talk) 22:40, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

As the warning I left on your talk page says, if you are removing content that is backed up by citations, the burden of proof is on you to explain why you are doing it.
If the source is out of date or incorrect, as you say on the article talk page (there are tons of sources that contradicts the contents of the source therefore can be review as hoax and unorthodox claims), then by all means cite those sources. But so far you have not provided any evidence in any of your edits, so I have reverted them. Iiii I I I (talk) 23:15, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
You also asked me why I warned you about vandalism to The Wailing (2016 film). Here are the edits you were blocked for: one, two, three, four, five. It's possible that you are editing from a shared IP address and the edits were made by someone else, as the warning also says. Iiii I I I (talk) 23:23, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Regarding the edits to the article for vandalism its possible someone else edit it as its a shared IP address as mentioned and I've never even watch the movie. @Iiii I I I 103.190.10.20 (talk) 23:48, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Okay I will provide the source and edit again @Iiii I I I but atleast make the habit of updating the editor before you make any changes. 103.190.10.20 (talk) 23:42, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Your recent post on talk:Mr. Accuracy Specialist

As tempting as it may be, posting Special:Diff/1277885705 is regarded as WP:GRAVEDANCING and is considered disruptive. Please do not do this again. Thanks. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 19:23, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Edit permissions

Will I ever be able to have me edit permissions back? Nnoonlight (talk) 21:07, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

I am blocked from editing

You said I am free to edit but it shows that I cannot edit Nnoonlight (talk) 15:42, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

TPA revoke

Re this, I totally get what you mean but I generally wait a bit (~1hr?) before considering a TPA yoink. Sometimes all the blocked user wants is the last word, so I haven't revoked TPA for now, but I will if they come back. Thanks, Giraffer (talk) 00:52, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Hey, can we please be friends? 2A02:C7C:75A8:C300:8898:CB94:79C2:6110 (talk) 22:07, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Oi

Stop trying to censor thestrober fans you dwong. What the hell is wrong with you hes provided good entertainment now youre trying to drown his voice and his fan's thestrober is a legend mate a LEGEND, famous and talented and thrashy 2A02:C7C:1AA4:A000:2586:36A4:FA2B:6AD2 (talk) 08:25, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Seems like you are jealous of TheStrober's infinite talent. Nothing to say or are you a mute jobsworth with no life that doesnt revolve around trying to destroy and censor great work.

Stop reverting me

It's very rude 2A02:C7C:1AA4:A000:2586:36A4:FA2B:6AD2 (talk) 08:26, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

I mean on the thrash metal page - why are you censoring pure talent --2A02:C7C:1AA4:A000:2586:36A4:FA2B:6AD2 (talk) 08:48, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Tony Amati Wikipage

Your description of Tony Amati as a serial killer Is incorrect. He was only convicted of one murder. The details of other crimes you attribute to him in your description he was found innocent. Im not highly skilled in wiki-editing but you source enough material you already know he isn't a serial killer. Just trying to correct the statements you have made that are untrue. I would appreciate you updating the page to reflect the record. SWW1977 (talk) 23:32, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi SWW1977, I think it would be reasonable to remove the phrase "serial killer" since (as you say) he was only convicted of one murder. However, you also removed additional information and citations about his connections to other crimes, which still belong on the page - I'll reword the article in a bit. Iiii I I I (talk) 00:01, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Anthony Mackie Page

Hello. I'm sorry for restoring vandalism on the Anthony Mackie page. I didn't mean to. It was a mistake. I just wanted to make minor corrections. I never mean to vandalise any pages. I always aim to remove vandalism. Janan2025 (talk) 15:03, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

No worries, I've also done the same thing before. Iiii I I I (talk) 19:19, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Iiii I I I, your reign of tyranny must stop

Not only have you brutally robbed the Wikipedia community of my harmless edits made to Daniel Ricciardo's Wikipedia page, but in doing so, you’ve also robbed me of the very passion I once had for this site. By reverting my changes, you've effectively rolled back human progress by at least 1000 years, reverting back to nothing more than caveman logic to do so. It’s as if the pursuit of joy and creativity has been lost in your revision, replaced by a cold, mechanical adherence to rules that fail to see the fun in human expression.

Have you not discovered the simple emotion of joy yet? Does calling a man "delicious", a phrase meant to evoke laughter, really fail to make you smile? Must we all remain shackled to the same dry, unbending standards, rid of the vibrant sparks that make life worth living? If killing the joy in this already lukewarm site was your goal, congrats beast you have succeeded.

You tried warning me about copyright, but I'm afraid you’re the only AI here. I mean, you changed my edit without even knowing who Daniel Ricciardo is! I’m certain he would’ve LOVED my joke.

I implore you to step back, reconsider, and embrace the possibility that Wikipedia can be both informative and delightful. Be the change you want to see. Baconeggandcheese (talk) 05:25, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Please use your own words to talk to me, not AI-generated text. Iiii I I I (talk) 05:27, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

post-postmodernism

You might want to check here Simonm223 (talk) 13:02, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

HESA Kowsar

Hi, please have some more consideration for what you're reverting and why. "Percent", "per-cent", and "per cent" are all valid and which one somebody uses will probably depend on where they were educated. Changing one to the other may not be especially helpful but that would be a content dispute. It's certainly not vandalism and it's not an exemption from the three-revert rule. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:42, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Isn't a quote meant to be verbatim? "100-percent indigenously made" is a direct quote from this cited article (diff), which does not contain a hyphen in the word "per-cent". Or am I going crazy? Iiii I I I (talk) 18:13, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for giving me my first Wikipedia THANKS. I appreciate it so much!!!

Xanthic Savick (talk) 00:44, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Tagging pages under WP:U5

Hello. Please be aware that this criterion only applies to pages that are located in userspace, and not for pages that are located (and were created) in main article space. CycloneYoris talk! 09:55, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Could you take a look

At this, please? i know you're a dog (talk) 06:48, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

The wording in that specific edit seems fine to me. I would assume good faith and just take it as Awshort being really strict about reliable sourcing. Be careful about further reverts – I haven't counted the exact number on the page, but reverting more than three times could result in sanctions (I've done this before unintentionally). Iiii I I I (talk) 07:14, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
Yeah, I won't further revert. Thanks for the reminder.
My concern with the wording is "considered as an example" makes it sound as though it is under consideration as to whether or not it is pink slime. But if you think it it's okay then I'll let sleeping dogs lie. i know you're a dog (talk) 07:22, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks ..

for helping out at the Bilzerian article. It was frustrating. 184.153.21.19 (talk) 22:16, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Marius Fill

I can see you have to remove it those things I have been adding to his family, do you don’t have any respect for him or even some honor at all?? Because this is the reality and you say this is not a reliable source, of course it is a reliable source because that is a part of the history and what lead up to what they were fighting for and also the closest family members and of course the children’s as well. And sometimes you need to have more websites and links if you want to pieces all together, including his sisters, brothers, children’s, grandchildren’s and so on. 80.208.68.164 (talk) 09:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Linna Fiil, don’t exist because that is not the name and I think you should you should removed this or maybe you can be banned because of vandalizing, Marius Fill has a daughter called Bitten Fill not Linna Fiil at all. 80.208.68.164 (talk) 10:16, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
https://www.billedbladet.dk/kendte/danmark/film/virkelighedens-kvinder-fra-hvidstengruppen-det-skete-der-med-dem-efter-krigen
https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/regionale/oestjylland/75-aar-siden-rev-gestapo-gudrun-ud-af-morens-arme-familien-fiil-mindes
Here is some information about the family members and also the children’s as well. 80.208.68.164 (talk) 10:19, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Vandalism warning

Hello...i want to change something,can please someone help me Buenshefane03 (talk) 02:05, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Buenshefane03 - you can get general help with editing Wikipedia at Wikipedia:Teahouse. Iiii I I I (talk) 02:51, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Felon

Hello. A felon is someone convicted of a felony. A crime - in the U.S. - punishable by death or more than one year in prison.

That is factual - not original research or subjective.

That essay is concerned with editors “resorting to a personal value judgement.” And uainf words like “fraudster.” This is not that at all. It is saying the person was convicted of a felony. That’s simply zero judgment non-judgment non-vague for “he was conveyed of a crime calling for …”

No need to delete it.

Plus - the essay is focused on ledes. Your second delete was not even to a lede.

Also, WP:felon is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. Another one or more contributors may have different views. It is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines. It has not been vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. 184.153.21.19 (talk) 06:59, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Non-encylopedic editing at Alien: Earth.

This edit (Alien: Earth: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia) is just not how we do things at Wikipedia. Please see WP:WWIN. Also please read Wikipedia:Review aggregators. It specifically states that "Review aggregators are not arbiters of critical consensus; sections about critical reception should also benefit from other reliable sources, such as books and periodicals reporting in retrospect how a film was received by critics."

Rotten Tomatoes is a corporately sponsored company independent of Wikipedia (which is itself not corporately sponsored) and funded by major film and television producers, we don't cater to their whims and don't give priority of weight to their scores. Please consider the Wikipedia mission (re:independent) when editing. - R9tgokunks ⭕ 00:07, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

I know what Wikipedia is and is not, and I know how Rotten Tomatoes works. Both RT and Metacritic indicate that the vast majority of critics gave a positive review to Alien: Earth (114/125 and 36/39, respectively), so adding two more negative reviews to "balance out" the three positive reviews gives undue weight to them, and gives readers the false impression that critical reception was closer to mixed. Iiii I I I (talk) 04:54, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

September 2025

Information icon Hello, I'm Buidhe. I noticed that you recently removed content from Laura Robson without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. I'm confused why you thought that it was a good idea to remove sources showing notability and then tag for deletion? Are you aware of WP:NAUTHOR? If there are enough book reviews to meet GNG the chances of getting consensus to delete at Afd are nil. (t · c) buidhe 15:51, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of WP:NAUTHOR – I was looking at WP:ACADEMIC, and the single sentence about her work didn't indicate she had significant impact on the field or held a notable position. It would be more informative to future readers if you expanded the page. Thanks for letting me know. Iiii I I I (talk) 04:03, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Sinners (2025 film) § Mid-credits scene

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Sinners (2025 film) § Mid-credits scene. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:01, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

New message from Rastinition

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Calearm99 § Comments by other users. Rastinition (talk) 11:02, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Anniversary Iiii I I I 🎉

Hey @Iiii I I I. Your wiki edit anniversary is today, marking 15 years of dedicated contributions to English Wikipedia. Your passion for sharing knowledge and your remarkable contributions have not only enriched the project, but also inspired countless others to contribute. Thank you for your amazing contributions. Wishing you many more wonderful years ahead in the Wiki journey. :) -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 16:24, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Iiii I I I (talk) 18:43, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

Predator: Badlands

Hi @Iiii I I I. I saw your removal of the ratings infobox, I have no issue with this as most other film articles do not include that, it is mainly used for video games. I noticed your editing to emphasise the spit in the plot summary, I have edited this phrase to a more encyclopaedic tone. The plot summary, for some reason, has been the target of persistent vandalism recently, which is a shame. The summary prose has improved, though there a still a few issues with informal word usage. These are very minor however. Thank you for your commitment to improving articles! 11WB (talk) 17:21, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

Haru Urara

The detail is in the lead to serve as an example of why the character is popular and notable. Further, the fact that the character's popularity led to the donation site crashing is going to be featured as a "Did you know?" hook on the front page of Wikipedia, which makes it a strange decision to not feature it in the lead. Quoting MOS:INTRO:

  1. "The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article, in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article" the article goes into detail on the grass delivered to the real-world horse, and it's arguably the biggest demonstration of how the character's popularity popularized the horse with fans. Removing it from the lead prevents the lead from properly explaining how the character's popularity manifested in popularity for the horse, aside from fanart, which gets much less coverage in reception than the donation story.
  2. "The reason for a topic's noteworthiness should be established, or at least introduced, in the lead" Part of why the character is noteworthy, according to reliable sourcing, is because of her connection to the horse and the increased popularity of the horse.
  3. "According to the policy on due weight, emphasis given to material should reflect its relative importance to the subject, according to published reliable sources." Reliable sources deemed this both significant to cover as well as directly relevant to Haru Urara.

Cukie Gherkin (talk) 19:45, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

Danny de Hek

Hi. It's very hard to figure out what has gone on with this article. I don't know if you were aware that there is also a draft of the same name. It looked to me as though there had been a lot of COI editing after the previous draft was reviewed and approved. I will look into the history a bit further and come back to you as soon as possible. Deb (talk) 09:52, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

I did not realize there was a draft, but I didn't look too closely at the page history in general. Thank you for reviewing this - no rush. Iiii I I I (talk) 09:57, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

Reverted Edits of This is Football 2

Hello,

You reverted my edits on the This is Football 2 article by citing that I have used some kind of AI model. Most of the summaries that I used came from old magazines which I also used as references in the article. I found the sources through the wayback archive. Also, the article is about a video game that was released in the early 2000s. I don't believe there is any other existing references to add into the article. Can you revert my changes?

Philosophysubboy(talk) 19:21, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

One of the links you cited has the ?utm_source=chatgpt.com parameter, which indicates it was created by ChatGPT. Even if it wasn't LLM-generated, there are other issues with your edit:
  • You say you "found the sources through the wayback archive", but there are no links to the Wayback Archive.
  • RomsFun is a website that hosts ROMs for download. It has no editorial oversight and is not a reliable source.
  • MobyGames is not a reliable source, per WP:GAMESOURCES, and should not be used.
  • Fandom is not a reliable source, as it is user-generated content, and should not be used.
  • The Balls.ie article is about This is Football (1999), not This is Football 2 (2000), so it is irrelevant here.
  • absolute-playstation.com is a dead link that redirects to a South African IT company, which is strange because you apparently accessed it while writing.
Once these are taken into account, your edit is left with one marginally-reliable source, psxdatacenter.com. You can readd just the sentences that cite the website as a source if you want, but I will not be restoring your changes. Iiii I I I (talk) 20:01, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

SORRY

Sorry If I Edited Something Wrong On Farrhana Bhatt page I'm a newbie actually. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Terimaakachicken (talk • contribs) 21:59, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to living or recently deceased subjects of biographical content on Wikipedia articles, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:48, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Kevin Anderson (American politician)

Hello Iiii I I I, please keep WP:BLPRESTORE and WP:ONUS in mind. If including the content is a good idea, finding a quick consensus to do so on the article's talk page should be simple. It will then persist as the page is now semi-protected. Thanks and best regards, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:50, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, I was just about to ask which page the contentious topics note was for. I don't remember the changes in detail, but I'll take a look again and start a discussion on the talk first. Iiii I I I (talk) 22:54, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Tellinghurst Adult Education Center

Can you make a Wikipedia page on Tellinghurst Adult Education Center? Christopher Lamar (talk) 05:56, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

In order for a page to exist, it needs to meet certain notability guidelines, including these ones for organizations. I don't have the time right now to research this center, but you can read about how to create your first article or ask for help with anything at the Teahouse. Iiii I I I (talk) 06:29, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Casual

hey there 👋 Iamabhisheksingh98 (talk) 09:23, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Concerns about use of rollback and edit warring

Looking at this edit you seem to be using rollback in a content dispute, and you appear to be edit warring. I advise you that your edits do not appear to have a clear cut exemption from 3RR. PhilKnight (talk) 05:27, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Yes, sorry - it just seemed to me to be bad faith in conjunction with these three edits to Anthony Kennedy. I'm discussing it at Talk:Antonin Scalia Law School#Former Name Inclusion Edit Warring. Iiii I I I (talk) 05:54, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
Thanks. PhilKnight (talk) 06:15, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Request to remove disputed content

I am requesting the removal of the following statements from this article Georg84 (talk) 16:17, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

  • References to Muslim Brotherhood affiliation
  • The statement that he went on a hunger strike while in prison
  • The claim that he lost his ability to walk, which is based on a family member’s statement

These statements are disputed, potentially inaccurate, and have a negative impact on the subject. Given that this is a biography of a living person, I believe these points should be reviewed under Wikipedia’s Biographies of Living Persons policy, and removed if they cannot be clearly verified to meet the required standards. I am seeking community guidance and consensus on this request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georg84 (talk • contribs) 16:19, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

Removing COI tag from Danny de Hek Article

Hi Iiii I I I,

Thank you for your work in getting the Danny de Hek article restored. I wanted to let you know about some cleanup I've done on the article and seek your input.

I removed the section titled "Allegations of coercive behaviour and disputes with journalists" per WP:BLPREMOVE. The section relied entirely on a single source from "Guru Magazine" (gurumag.com), which does not meet Wikipedia's reliable source standards for contentious BLP claims:

  • The publication is a self-published blog without editorial oversight
  • Neither the publication nor its author have demonstrated notability
  • The allegations made (including "blackmail," "coercion," and "abusive" conduct) are serious and require high-quality sourcing per WP:EXTRAORDINARY

Per BLP policy, contentious material that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately.

I've also noted that the {{COI}} template was placed without an accompanying talk page discussion. Per WP:WTRMT, this template can be removed if the tagging editor failed to initiate supporting discussion.

I've documented my rationale on the article's talk page. Please let me know if you have any concerns or if you're aware of any reliable sources that might support the removed content.

Thanks, M20294135122 (talk) 13:20, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

Welcome!


Hi Iiii I I I, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you have any questions, you can get help from experienced editors at the Teahouse. Happy editing! Robert McClenon (talk) 17:25, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

"Silent Night (upcoming film)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Silent Night (upcoming film) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 January 13 § Silent Night (upcoming film) until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 02:41, 13 January 2026 (UTC)