User talk:DerbyCountyinNZ/Archive 5

Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6

WP:RY

Your edit to the guideline should have reflected consensus, and I don't think it did. Arguments against inclusion of a birth/death in year articles include the quality (or, at least, the length) of both the en.Wikipedia article and that of the articles on foreign wikis. In fact, there may even be consensus that, for deaths, the en.Wikipedia article needs to be more than a sub-stub at death. User:The Rambling Man (who doesn't want me to ping him) insists that, to be consistent, I should have reverted your edits to WP:RY, as well as his. Personally, I don't consider you a disruptive editor, so I don't see what he calls "consistency" as a requirement. But he does have a point (or, at least, a WP:POINT), so some discussion seems in order. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:28, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

I don't recall that there was ever a case that someone was included after failing the minimum criteria just because the article about them was well-written. And I have never argued that someone who passed the minimum should be excluded just because their article was poorly written (and I don't recall that anyone else has either); it may have been that it was poorly written but that would have been coincidental to that fact that the actual content did not reflect any international notability. I have certainly argued that the quality of the non-English articles is a factor in exclusion, but that is not the issue here. As I understand it, TRM is arguing that a good quality article indicates notability when it does not, it may only reflect notability. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 20:35, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
No he is not. Quality and notability are two different parameters. Please don't put words in my mouth. And Rubin, you're the disruptive one, claiming one editor can't change a guideline and reverting it while allowing another editor to do precisely that. Abusing your position. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:06, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes quality and notability are different parameters. The current requirement for inclusion in year pages is notability, not quality. And I did not put words in your mouth, here is a quote from the Recent Years talk page: "I believe a quality criterion needs to be added to this project". DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 08:14, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
You said "TRM is arguing that a good quality article indicates notability" which is patently untrue. If you don't understand that, perhaps best not to make comments or claims on my behalf. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:19, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Currently the only requirement for inclusion is notability. You want to add a quality criterion for inclusion. Why? If quality does NOT indicate notability then why would we need a quality requirement for inclusion? Feel free to clarify your intentions on this matter. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 08:29, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
What are you talking about? How do you think FAC or FLC or ITN or OTD or DYK ... works? The Rambling Man (talk) 08:31, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
Who cares? They are completely unrelated to Year articles. Show me which category they have in common. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 08:34, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
They are examples of projects which use both quality and notability. That's what I'm saying, not all the stuff you're making up. Now then, let's focus on those RfCs, and how we're going to change the project as a result of them demonstrating beyond a shadow of a doubt that RY is currently not aligned with community expectations. See you later! The Rambling Man (talk) 08:36, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
Not on here. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 08:37, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
Definitely not! I only came here to ask you not to make things up that I might have said. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:40, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

ANI complaint against Arthur Rubin

I'm asking you to copy my statement from the Arbcom complaint against me to the ANI report against me, and add the following to my sentence about adding diffs from my phone: It's possible to add diffs from my phone. It takes many times longer than on the desktop, but it's possible. What is not possible is recovering from an Edit conflict. Control-C, Control-V, and control-A (select all) are possible, but not shift-click (select to cursor).

— Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:05, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Tap and hold within the text to highlight a word, drag the first cursor to the start of the block of text you want to copy, drag the second cursor to the end, copy, paste. As I'm sure you already know perfectly well. ‑ Iridescent 19:24, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Alternatively you can go to [1] choose Edit Source than Select All and Copy. On the ANi page you can choose edit and paste on your phone. In the unlikely chance of an edit conflict in an essentially concluded ANi thread, just paste again. I rarely use a desktop and do just fine on my phone. Good luck. Legacypac (talk) 20:14, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Or just type at ANI what you want to write in there using your phone. This page, for instance, is outside your editing restrictions, but because you're an admin, you're safe from any kind of sanction. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:26, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
Or better still go to Bishonen and ask for a self-requested indef block. –Davey2010Talk 20:52, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Richard Arvin Overton!

Dear Derby, please take a look at his talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Richard_Arvin_Overton (more fan-fluff nonsense!) I did delete the offending information, but that edit was reverted. Regards, MattSucci (talk) 07:10, 6 August 2017 (UTC) .

I've removed the fancruft as per previous consensus. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 07:56, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Limbo cases

You saying there needs to be a source saying someone has died for them to be removed from the oldest people list is completely unreasonable. These are just regular people who lived to high ages so there are not going to be sources for all of their deaths. So some of them go into limbo which means there is a possibility that they are dead because of no updates or an unofficial death report and when this happens they shouldn't be on lists of living people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorglorg (talk • contribs) 02:58, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi

Just wanted to let you know you're edits on Nabi Tajima and Oldest people have been undone. 100.40.125.198 (talk) 20:28, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Oldest man Vs. male.

It is confusing. Just check this BBC report and then you will see. http://www.bbc.com/persian/world-40909332 Tafshina (talk) 08:59, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

That report is not in English. There is no confusion in English. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 09:05, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Dragon of 2016

I suggest you use "hoax", rather than "drivel". Removing hoaxes is exempt from WP:3RR, while removing drivel, if not complete nonsense, is not. While editors are trying to damage WP:RY, we must be careful. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 12:49, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Noted, Arthur Rubin. Now provide the latest diffs you are required to so. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:08, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
I'd prefer that my Talk Page was exempt from your stalking of other editors. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 22:59, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

{{Recent death}}

Recent death/doc is meant to alert editors of rapid changing edits on the onset of a well known persons death, it is not used to advertise or confirm the death itself. - FlightTime (open channel) 03:41, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

September 2017 at Women in Red

Welcome to Women in Red's September 2017 worldwide online editathons.

Ana Recio Harvey.jpg

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Ipigott (talk) 11:06, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Bridgette Andersen

I see that Bridgette Andersen is largely uncited and was probably written by her internet cult following. I'm asking around about what to do. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 05:44, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Chiyo Miyako

I'm intrigued to hear a reason why a link to a list is not sufficient other than you not wanting this woman to have any kind of article anywhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorglorg (talk • contribs) 17:43, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Well? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorglorg (talk • contribs) 06:06, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
The tone of your question does not deserve a response. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 09:05, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
Why is a link to a list insufficient?
If you won't answer my question then I'm reverting your edits where you use this as a reason.--Dorglorg (talk) 23:34, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Any edits/reverts you make against consensus and/or wiki guidelines will get reverted. Persist and expect a trip to ANI or Arbcom. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 03:16, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

User:212.88.36.183

User:212.88.36.183 has been at it again. I suggest you ban him/her. nagualdesign 22:35, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Oldest living people consensus

Could you link me to that consensus?--Dorglorg (talk) 04:30, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Sure, as soon as you link the consensus that it stopped at 113. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 09:52, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
I'm willing to concede that it changed to support what you're saying, I just want you to link it because I don't know where to find it. Now can you please stop being confrontational and just link me to it?--Dorglorg (talk) 13:14, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Source

Did you actually just revert an edit for saying I don't need a source when I provided a source IN THE EDIT SUMMARY? Are you mentally deficient? Dorglorg (talk) 13:49, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Stay off my talk page. You have nothing worth reading. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 16:54, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
You didn't answer the question. Are you?--Dorglorg (talk) 20:08, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Never mind. When you spend your entire day searching for edits on Wikipedia to revert, you're going to slip up every once in a while. I understand.--Dorglorg (talk) 20:13, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Seeing as you have a clear failure of comprehension, which is not surprising as you're yet another in a long list of pathetic, whiney longevity fans: I have more important things to do than follow up after immature idiots and other cretins who edit longevity pages and a) don't know what they're doing; b) take months to learn how to sign talk page posts; c) even when you tell them they're violating Wiki policy/guidelines/consensus keep doing it or claim that it doesn't exist; d) use editor's talk pages when they should use article talk pages. Unfortunately, someone has to. Most of the GRG fan club got booted off Wiki for the same reasons and are now playing in the 110 club where they can be pathetic to their hearts content. Given your editing history it wouldn't surprise me if you join them, it would be no loss to Wikipedia. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 03:11, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Jane Webster

Is this a reliable source for the death of Jane Webster? http://gerontology.wikia.com/wiki/Jane_Webster — Preceding unsigned comment added by Universimmedia (talk • contribs) 13:11, 13 November 2017 (UTC) --universimmedia (talk) 13:13, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

No. Gerontology Wikia and the 110 club are not considered reliable sources by Wikipedia. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 16:47, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
OK. Was about to ask if http://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/henley-on-thames/117784/jean-webster-longest-lived-person-born-in-northern-ireland.html was a reliable source, but it's just been added. Where can I find a list of which are considered reliable sources and which are not for this kind of facts? Thanks! --universimmedia (talk) 23:13, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
There is no list as such but generally news sources are considered reliable and self-published (usually fansites) are not. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 03:01, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
OK, thanks. That makes sense. Sorry about dumb newbie questions. Actually I have been actively contributing to WP in the early years, even was one of the first editors of French WP in 2001, but have been mostly inactive for years. I'm at lost with the growing quantity of regulations, and fed up with editing wars. BTW I should update my profile, many obsolete stuff :) --universimmedia (talk) 10:12, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, DerbyCountyinNZ. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Sorry about the Whangamomona issue.

Sorry for any mistakes made by me I promise to never do my mistakes. Thanks. John Chibona (talk) 03:39, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Please do post process of vanishing mini-bio section

It is too irresponsible to make such editing other people.[2][3]

NO need to reply this message, but please remove all of the redirected links of Ura Koyama and Tase Matsunaga in English Wikipedia. Please remove all responsibly. Inception2010 (talk) 14:18, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

I am disappointed. You are the person who remove biography sections, so should do such edits[4][5][6] as well. You robbed my time. Why don't you do it yourself? Inception2010 (talk) 14:26, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
I made all the edits that you should do. If you can't do such edits[7][8], please stop editing oldest people related articles. please don't robbing others time.Inception2010 (talk) 13:41, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

My Answer to your Warning:

Hello DerbyCountyinNZ! Seriously why im getting a warning?? I deleted a wrong information in "List of oldest living people". The age of "Maria Emilia Quesada" isn't verified, she isn't even in the ranking of the Supercentenarians as well!She doesn't belong in the list of the oldest living peoples(because it needs to be verified) Source: http://www.grg.org/SC/WorldSCRankingsList.html This warning was just misplaced...Jonx11 (talk) 05:20, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

This topic has been going on the talk page for weeks and you can see from the edit summaries for the article that removing her goes against consensus. The position of only the GRG verifying age is NOT tolerated as per the RFC as noted in the talk page. Editors who make edits on a "GRG only" basis have been topic banned from longevity articles. There is the very possibility that more such editors will be following them in the near (more or less) future. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 05:30, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Interesting that you're on your first day editing under this name, would you like to list any other names you've edited under? DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 05:36, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

White space vandal

Would be nice if Wikimedia could track down the White space vandal & end his trolling, permanently. GoodDay (talk) 05:08, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

It would, although I suspect there's more than 1. I'd have thought it would be possible to create a bot that detects this activity so they could be blocked instantaneously. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 05:19, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
A bot would be perfect. GoodDay (talk) 05:27, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

He/she is likely the same individual, using the unregistered Mobile phone account, to mess with the 'period' placement in the intros of List of current heads of state and government & List of Presidents of India articles. GoodDay (talk) 16:30, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Question about OR trivia

I might regret doing this, but I'm wondering why the article about Delina Filkins says that she was the first to reach 112 and 113, while the article about Mathew Beard doesn't mention that he was the first to reach 114. Would you be so kind as to explain why that is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.248.137.140 (talk) 22:28, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Sock puppet

I’m not a sock puppet and I’ve never had any Wikipedia account before this. Stop falsely accusing me of violating Wikipedia’s rules. Coolguy48s (talk) 00:10, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Sock puppet?

Hello DerpyCountyinNZ

I am DaBestMonEva, the one that you have recently flagged for suspicion of being something known as a "sock puppet" of an older user who has been banned.

I am sorry to say that I do not know what this is, so I do not know if it is something bad or not.

Please let me know what a sock puppet actually is.

Feel free to message me on my own talk page.

Cheers,

DaBestMonEva (talk) 23:19, 18 May 2018 (UTC) DaBestMonEva

A difference between a centenarian and a supercentenarian.

A centenarian is a person who lives to or beyond the age of 100 years, while a supercentenarian is a person who has lived to or passed their 110th birthday. Frederica Sagor Maas lived to 111 years old, so that makes her a supercentenarian. Or am I wrong again, DerbyCountyinNZ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petrandreev13 (talk • contribs) 16:59, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

A supercentenarian is a centenarian. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 17:47, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Okay, so Jeanne Calment lived to 122 years, and yet she was actually 100-109 years of age, or what? Petrandreev13 (talk) 19:54, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

A centenarian is 100+ NOT 100-19. Supercentenarians are 110, therefore all supercentenarians are centenarians. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 04:00, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Boniswa Paulina Jevu

Do you have a valid reason why you did not include this individual on Oldest People/Ten Oldest Living People? I'm trying to get a better understanding of what I consider to be your sloppy, incomplete contributions.TFBCT1 (talk) 07:24, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Why don't you just do it instead of whining every time I fix your biased editing? DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 07:35, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Tirau, FYI

I've just edited the Tirau page to note the (macronised) Maori spelling as well - as we've done with other pages for towns with Maori-origin names. I hope this will satisfy the Macronistas (though I wouldn't count on it :-) Ross Finlayson (talk) 03:53, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

I wouldn't count on it either. Unfortunately. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 04:47, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Major issues regarding "Polish" emigrants

There is an ongoing discussion on the List of Polish supercentenarians talk page regarding major violations of Wikipedia policy, which you might be interested in joining. Newshunter12 (talk) 14:45, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Chiyo Miyako

http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/news/2018/7/oldest-person-title-officially-achieved-by-117-year-old-chiyo-miyako-before-her-d-534017 This is a source that Chiyo Miyako has passed away Ignoto2 (talk) 10:50, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of List of surviving veterans of the Spanish Civil War for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of surviving veterans of the Spanish Civil War is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of surviving veterans of the Spanish Civil War until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

You have edited the article since 2008, so I imagine you would like to know about this development. Newshunter12 (talk) 01:28, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed the Afd. It was created when List of surviving veterans of World War I was coming to a conclusion, essentially the fans of that sort of thing looking for something else to do. I always thought it was too soon, although it is now almost at the stage where it might actually be worthwhile! I'm not too fussed about whether it stays or goes, List of notable surviving veterans of World War II is a far, far worse excuse for an article. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 01:42, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the insight. Based on what I found, there are still at least hundreds of veterans left, which the article doesn't reflect at all and it is horribly maintained (one man's most recent source proving life is over 10 years old!). As far as I can tell, the reliable sources just don't exist for this article to properly exist. These vets are living their lives in peace it seems, not looking for media coverage or to please fans I bet they don't know they even have nor would care about. If it's not too much trouble, your input on the AFD would be much appreciated - I would like it to not get stalled like the Polish one due to lack of input. Failed articles the fans have moved on from don't seem to attract much interest. Newshunter12 (talk) 02:51, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Deletion review for Chiyo Miyako

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Chiyo Miyako. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Andrew D. (talk) 17:42, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The New Zealand Barnstar of National Merit
For your steady and long-term work on all things New Zealand! Keep it up!

Ira Leviton (talk) 17:18, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

this WikiAward was given to DerbyCountyinNZ by Ira Leviton (talk) on 17:18, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, DerbyCountyinNZ. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, DerbyCountyinNZ. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Stonehenge

Hi DerbyCountyinNZ! I would like to reply to your recent message on my talk page. Shall I do it here, or will you see it if I reply on my own talk page? Thanks Youtryandyoutry (talk) 22:16, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

If you're going to justify your inclusion of the reference to murno gladst then it would be best to do this on Talk:Stonehenge so that other readers can contribute to the discussion. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 22:21, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
Hi DerbyCountyinNZ I will gladly do this, but I would like to respond directly to your message. Essentially, I understand the confusion I briefly caused, and I'd like to explain. I was trying to move a reference from where I had placed it (at the end of the sentence) to exactly where someone had posted a "citation needed" tag (in the middle of the sentence). Unfortunately I copied the wrong ref tag (a footer and not a header tag was moved to the start of the reference) and I didn't preview the changes which I am normally careful to do. It was a bit of a disaster, and I was horrified that I had caused an unsightly error message to appear on the Stonehenge page for a few minutes. I rushed to fix it and only made matters worse until I ended up undoing my two edits and then finally doing what I had intended to do: place the correct reference exactly where someone had requested it. It was this change which has just been reverted due to the chaos I created. A murno gladst fence is an old term for a kind of embankment, but it is also the unique name for this kind of embankment and it appears in numerous publications about henges etc from the 1600s onwards. I've got a special interest in the subject as I do many other obscure subjects. My first edits on wikipedia years ago were also about this subject and I did it incorrectly which resulted in my entry being removed and the message you saw on my talk page. I wanted to clear this up with you personally because I felt I was being perceived to be doing something that I was not. Youtryandyoutry (talk) 22:29, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
As you have failed to take this to the Stonehenge talk page I will do it for you. I advise you to read it carefully. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 00:10, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Unknown reason for warning

Hello DerbyCountyinNZ, you have recently given me a warning for a few of the gerontology pages due to the fact that I removed an unvalidated supercentenarian and claimed that I believed GRG was the ultimate source. If you somehow saw this as the case, then I apologize as this was not the case. I looked at many different articles and sites before performing the edit. If you could, please let me know the rule that I broke so I may not break it again. Thank you,

DaBestMonEva (talk) 03:56, 14 January 2019 (UTC)DaBestMonEva

Clarification

Hello once again DerbyCountyinNZ. Thank you for clarifying the reason for the warning, I will be more careful in the future and hope to possibly work alongside you on the gerontology wikis as well.

DaBestMonEva (talk) 14:16, 14 January 2019 (UTC)DaBestMonEva

Bans & Blocks

A little bit of trivia for you, bans & blocks aren't the same thing. I saw an edit summary where you used one and meant the other. It's as well to know before you use it somewhere that the distinction matters. Hope that helps, Cabayi (talk) 13:30, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Caren Marsh Doll

Hi. Is this a valid reference link for Caren Marsh Doll's centenary (100th birthday)? (https://www.facebook.com/pg/Caren-Marsh-Doll-259399637720/posts/) Thanks. Rms125a@hotmail.com 05:26, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Facebook is not considered a reliable source. She was obviously still alive at 100 so there should be a reliable source out there somewhere. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 05:40, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, you'd think so. But .... Anyway, how about this one? Rms125a@hotmail.com 06:20, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
No good. Just a fansite that acknowledges her birthday, no indication that she's actually still alive. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 08:05, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
I give up. Either I am missing something or we have to to wait, possibly until the inevitable obituary. Rms125a@hotmail.com 18:43, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

In regard to your level 3 template on my talk page

Dear User:DerbyCountyinNZ, Thanks for the level 3 template, I'm guessing you have a problem with one of my two edits on Papakura : either (diff 1) or (diff 2) . So I'm also guessing you know something that I do not and either [hehe] or HIGH SCHOOLS is in fact a real secondary education institution and I should have engaged in some talk page debate before removing them. I will reflect on this. - Scio c (talk) 15:11, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

My bad. Somehow got the wrong user. Mea culpa. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 10:07, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
No problem, easy enough to do. I hope my message read as tongue in cheek and not angry sarcasm. Cheers - Scio c (talk) 19:26, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Yep, all good! Cheers, DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 04:44, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Attempt to develop consensus

Please see here if you are interested in helping to develop consensus regarding Jeanne Calment's age. Rockstonetalk to me! 18:22, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

  • When the article unlocks I am going to edit the List of Verified Oldest People page to User:Rockstone35/draft:list_of_the_verified_oldest_people. I haven't seen any sign of consensus developing other than that you and I both agree that a footnote is the least disruptive compromise. I have made great strides to get other people to communicate on the talk page, but so far only User:Oska has (in addition to use). Oska has claimed that the article already reflected consensus, but I don't see any evidence of such a discussion and he has been unwilling to communicate to me. Georgia guy even less so. I don't want to start another edit war, but if the editing remains tenacious, where should we go? Rockstonetalk to me! 17:21, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

YOU’RE GETTING OUT OF LINE

Do you even know what the issue was on the edit that you decided to arbitrarily revert that was in contention and in disagreement with by two editors? Who do you think you are to make decisions without taking them to the talk page when consensus appears to be challenged? Why do you feel it is OK to continually harass a long-standing contributor such as myself with taunts like “wiki fan-club.” I am keeping a file on you and will eventually take action. TFBCT1 (talk) 08:16, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Māori people

The "warrior culture" part is very misleading. This was probably put here because of someone misapprehending the Haka as a "warrior" dance, when in fact it is merely a welcoming dance. "Having "warrior" on here sounds like a generalisation or perhaps a harmful stereotype. And think about it. If it's on here, then why on the English people page doesn't it say that they are warriors, and have a habit of oppressing people of colour and taking away their land sovereignty?--Leavepuckgackle1998 (talk) 06:54, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

What a load of agenda-pushing PC bollocks! This shouldn't even be discussed on my talk page. The appropriate place is the talk page of the article. If you are incapable of WP:NPOV you should rethink your contributions to Wikipedia. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 10:08, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

August 2019

Information icon Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Cecilia Seghizzi. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Ad Orientem (talk) 04:19, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Edit warring

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Cecilia Seghizzi shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. 103.120.66.68 (talk) 10:20, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

List of oldest living state leaders

Hello i want to add pictures to the List of oldest living state leaders. SCUTI85 (talk) 06:01, 14 September 2019 (UTC) Hello i want to add pictures to the List of oldest living state leaders. SCUTI85 (talk) 06:03, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

The article does not need any more pictures. Repeatedly changing the page and then changing it back just wastes everybody else's time. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 06:07, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
I think we have a WP:SOCK situation. See brand new Maria Binion account. GoodDay (talk) 19:25, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
And both gone! On top of that the page has semi-pp for the next year. Thumbs up icon DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 04:43, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

List of centenarians

Hello,

I just want to let you know, that I reverted your edit on the page of List of centenarians (military commanders and soldiers). Brigadier general Ronald R. Van Stockum is certainly a centenarian and it could be easily verify with reading of an article with references. Maybe instead of reverting my edit, you could add the reference from the article of him. Please be more constructive for next time.

Best regards AntonyZ (talk) 23:54, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

I fixed your edit with the actual date of the article and the correct accessdate. And in fact I did check the article (briefly) to see if there was something obvious which mentioned that he had celebrated his 100th birthday, and didn't spot anyhthing. I don't have time to waste chasing up people who can't add appropriate citations to articles. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 02:22, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
I think I made it clear. Please make doublecheck first, before you make some changes and ill-considered decisisions. If you take a look on the reference, which I had add ("The Early years of a Centenarian: Recalling the past 100 years or so".), you will find out, that this is an interview with Brigadier general Ronald R. Van Stockum, who was 103 year old then and IT IS a relevant source. If you want to serve as Page reviewer, you should act more helpful for other Wikipedians.
Thank you for your effort AntonyZ (talk) 08:39, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
Like I said, I only had a quick look, as I do for any such edits to those particular pages and if I see an obvious citation I add it myself. Otherwise it is not an ill-considered decision to simply revert. If people can't add a citation, when it is clear that one is warranted, then I prefer to encourage them to fix their own failure. Next time why don't YOU make sure YOU add the appropriate citation. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 04:11, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Declined speedy deletion tags

Do not re-add declined speedy deletion tags. WilyD 10:28, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

The edit summary you provided did not indicate that the speedy had been "declined", merely removed. If it had been declined I would not have reverted. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 16:39, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Helen Shingler

You say that is not reliable source about her death. Maybe there will not be any other source and I am 100% sure it is her. So according to you she will be omitted from centenarian actors. Even IMDB has her dead on this date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miloradovan (talk • contribs) 12:46, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

This site looks like a self-published source to me. You could try WP:RSN and see if it passes, but I would be surprised if it did. IMDB is definitely not a WP:RS and can't be used as the sole source for DoB/DoD. There are plenty of reliable sources from before she was 100 so maybe there will be at least 1 obituary soon that confirms she made it. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 16:56, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Responce

Responce
I wasn't "vandalizing" anything. I was removing information that had a deceptive source (a Cuban tabloid) and no information to prove the accuracy of the claim. That's one of the things I hope this site would do. It looks like the post was taken down anyway. Noblem88 (talk) 07:17, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Virginia McLaurin

Virginia McLaurin article, that is fine?, but i just don't understand? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.43.229.8 (talk) 10:17, 8 January 2020 (UTC) i see member was threatened to block me over article Virginia McLaurin, i am not going to take it to the talk page, because i really don't understand what he major concern is — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.43.229.8 (talk) 10:25, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Alice Robinson

I thought it was just me who thought that! Thanks for trimming down the dross and keeping the cream. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:56, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

No worries. It seems to happen a lot with sports people, but this was worse than most. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 03:44, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Amin marin

A tag has been placed on Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Amin marin requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:41, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

List of the verified oldest people.

Dear Derby, please could you look at the latest discussion on the talk page. Your insight and advice would be greatly appreciated. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_the_verified_oldest_people#Men's_list. Regards, Matt MattSucci (talk) 04:04, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Wording on Oldest people

You don't think "purportedly" is more clear than "claimed to have"? I feel like the text "Calment's daughter Yvonne, born in 1898 and claimed to have died in 1934" implies that Yvonne claimed to have died in 1934. That is to say, if you ask Yvonne, she'll tell you that she died in 1934. Now, if the claim that Yvonne did in fact replace Jeanne is accurate, then you can ask Yvonne (under the guise of being Jeanne) (pretending for the moment that she's still alive so I can use present tense verbs) and Yvonne would technically claim that Yvonne died in 1934, but the reader shouldn't have to play mental games in order to understand a sentence. That is why I changed the wording from "claimed to have" to "purportedly" because the latter is still a claim, but by anyone (a first-party or third-party), in order to clear up the strange wording of Yvonne claiming that Yvonne died. Useight (talk) 01:11, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Your version was no improvement on an already poorly written sentence. Leaving aside the unencyclopedic WP:WEASEL WORDs "However" and "nevertheless", the dated and awfully constructed "which still is not resolved almost a year later" and the undue weight on the sentence in the first place, the correct English should have been "...which hypothesized that Calment's daughter Yvonne, born in 1898 and who is reported to have died in 1934, usurped Jeanne's identity upon her mother's death...". It is probably time to revisit the discussion and clarify whether it is time the whole sentence was removed. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 01:30, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm also good with "who is reported to have died". I'll go ahead and change it to that. As for whether or not the whole sentence should be rewritten or even removed entirely, that's a whole different question. Fortunately, we don't have to limit ourselves to deciding only between the status quo and the perfect end scenario. For what it's worth, I'd also be good with taking the entire thing out per WP:UNDUE. Useight (talk) 06:54, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

"inappropriate use of succession box"

Why is this so? PAustin4thApril1980 (talk) 10:41, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

There is no such title as "World's Oldest Living State Leader". DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 10:42, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

List of centenarians (actors, filmmakers and entertainers) instead of List of centenarians (actors, filmmakers, and entertainers)

First of all, thanks for supporting me at Talk:List of centenarians (actors, filmmakers, and entertainers)#Title_change, but could you therefore ask at Wikipedia:Requested moves to get the correct title back (since only registered users can do this!), or can I just move its content to that one and ask a mod(erator) to get it removed (I don't suppose I can though)? Secondly, could you also answer my question at Talk:List of centenarians (actors, filmmakers, and entertainers)#Unreliable source, please? Thanks in advance! 62.235.138.156 (talk) 14:16, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for answering my question about The Daily Telegraph, but I just posed a follow-up question over there, and what about my poignant question over here above, please? 62.235.138.156 (talk) 16:27, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
@DerbyCountyinNZ: You did do some other stuff, so I know you have been online! 62.235.138.156 (talk) 02:24, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
@DerbyCountyinNZ: Are you really even too busy these days not to have the time for at least asking to arrange this proposed title change we agreed upon the other day? 62.235.138.156 (talk) 03:48, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Yes, actually I have been busier than usual this week. And I don't appreciate being hassled over a trivial matter like this, especially by an editor who can't even be bothered to create a user profile. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 04:24, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but "hassled" is a bit harsh, isn't it, and I beg you pardon: it's not an obligation to do so, or is it then, plus even so I wouldn't be able to revert the title change. 62.235.138.156 (talk) 21:59, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Free Pass ?

I see you used to follow strict WP:RY on time line articles such as 2014 as with this edit [9]. It has strictly been followed for articles 2000-2016 but you guys seem to have turned a blind eye to articles such as 2018, 2019 and 2020 filled with WP:RY and Wp:recentism violation and including in them domestic events, elections, minor disasters which even have 0 deaths (even the Indian floods with 1000 + deaths wasnt added but now a days floods with even 10 deaths are added), sports that are not notable enough per wp:ryetc that would not be allowed in older articles like say 2005. Heck 2005 does not have a single thing listed in June. Nothing about the Iraq and Afghan war, bird flu epidemic and major disasters that happened then (except the Kashmir disaster the only one included). No one follows the three continent news coverage rule in the post 2016 articles. You editors used to butcher additions to articles in 2000-2016 in the name of WP:RY, but now turned lazy and have given up and 2018, 2019, 2020 are over flooded with WP:RY violation. This just gives an extremely false impression that the years 2000-2016 are less ventful and less signficant to years since 2018, and just shows why wikipedia is still considered unreliable by majority people over the world... Dilbaggg (talk) 05:15, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

I stopped having any interest in these articles when the new criteria were bludgeoned into place several years ago. I suspect they no longer reflect an appropriate encyclopedic tone or style. 05:23, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
Yup they don't. Well you weren't the only editor following wp:ry. But all those who did have stopped. Arthur Rubin is the only one |I see and he doesn't care anymore, he lets others add whatever they want. Its all fine if only all the information that were removed from 2000-2016 when wp:ry was strictly enforced was added back and nothing would be removed under the current flexible conditions, but yeah no one will have the the time for that. Anyway sorry about bring it to you, you were not the only one involved and I respect your decision to stop caring. Have a nice life. Dilbaggg (talk) 05:48, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Eric Verdonk

On 4 April 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Eric Verdonk, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Indefensible (talk) 20:18, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Addition of Nina Willis to oldest living persons list

I would like to nominate Nina Willis to be added to the oldest living persons page. Born: January 14, 1909 Citation: fox5atlanta.com/news/georgia-woman-celebrating-111th-birthday. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bromleychuck (talk • contribs) 16:05, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in longevity. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

creffett (talk) 18:37, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Just a reminder for both parties in the current AN/I thread - I see that your last notification was in 2016. creffett (talk) 18:39, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Curious

Hello, for a long time I've been curious about something. When a Wikipedia member dies, what happens to the account?Timothy McGuire (talk) 22:39, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

I think this covers it. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 23:27, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Doomer 1557

Howdy, do you have any theories as to why @Doomer1557:'s posts have inaccurate time on them? GoodDay (talk) 18:12, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Bruh. 'Doomer1557' ( talk) 21:02, 1 July 2020 (UTC )
You're being a dick & it's only a matter of time, before you're blocked. GoodDay (talk) 19:39, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Calm down. I'm just very surprised that anyone cares. And let's do it without insults. 'Doomer1557' ( talk) 22:46, 1 July 2020 (UTC )
No idea! If it's intentional I'm not sure what recourse there would be to have it stopped (but it should be). If unintentional I would expect that a co-operative user would find out themselves and have it fixed. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 20:59, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
I am not an English-speaking person, so I have no idea how time works on Wikipedia. There may be problems with time zones. 'Doomer1557' ( talk) 13:49, 1 July 2020 (UTC )
If you sign your posts properly it will always be UTC time. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 10:51, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
But if you think this is such a terrible and important issue that threatens Wikipedia, then I can just stop signing up the time, like now. 'Doomer1557' ( talk), 2 July 2020 (UTC ) —Preceding undated comment added 10:55, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
So you are not here to edit cooperatively then. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 11:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
What? I have no idea what you're talking about. I'm just trying to explain that I do not consider this issue important. No one was uncomfortable because of this for a long time. 'Doomer1557' ( talk) 14:13, 2 July 2020 (UTC )
Please don't add Guaido to the aforementioned article, as you don't have a consensus to do so. GoodDay (talk) 14:02, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Let's discuss it not here, but on the talk page. 'Doomer1557' ( talk) 17:08, 2 July 2020 (UTC )
Will you PLEASE sign your posts CORRECTLY? GoodDay (talk) 14:10, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
I don’t have much time to learn this right now. Be patient. 'Doomer1557' ( talk) 17:12, 2 July 2020 (UTC )

DerbyCountyinNZ, guess I boo booed at WP:AN :( GoodDay (talk) 15:36, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Centenarian actors

I know that you are correcting list of Centenarian actors and thank you. But these actors are well known in their countries and you should not delete what I have posted just because there are not any evidence of the turning 100 in English language as for Diana Maggi. Arnold Yarrow was mantioned as oldest living actor in Dr. Who series since Earl Cameron died aged 102. https://twitter.com/drwhocastcrew/status/1251042015246266369 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miloradovan (talk • contribs) 10:34, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

One of the criteria for inclusion is that there is a reliable source which mentions that the person was alive on their hundredth birthday. Speculation that they are still alive because there is no report that they have died is insufficient. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 10:44, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

So when they die they will be added to this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miloradovan (talk • contribs) 11:06, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Only if there is a reliable source which says they were at least 100 years old when they died. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 11:37, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

History of Air New Zealand

I restored some content you deleted over 10 years ago. I'm not sure why you deleted it. The incident belongs here. There is more to this, though I am not qualified to write it. ANZ losing 1/3 of its DC-8 fleet just a year into its existence HAD to have a huge effect logistically if not financially. I only remember the incident because I was in Auckland that day. I was going to write a talk message identifying its omission. Trackinfo (talk) 06:47, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

The minutiae of an air accident involving no members of the public and having no impact on the use of the aircraft is not encyclopedic. This belongs in a book/article about the History of Air New Zealand not in an entry in an encyclopedia. If it is mentioned at all it should be a lot briefer than what you have restored. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 07:24, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Over exuberant newbie

This fellow @KILLERXR:, is becoming annoying. GoodDay (talk) 08:51, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

They were annoying a while ago. I'm wondering if they've been blocked under other accounts. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 08:53, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

We'll I'm very sorry @Gooday if I got you annoyed KILLERXR (talk) 09:46, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

reverted List of centenarians (miscellaneous)

Hello, you reverted my edit to List of centenarians (miscellaneous) for uncertainties in birthday. Maybe you were confused with Vikram Samvat or maybe I did not understand. Could you explain? nirmal (talk) 05:02, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Both articles have (or had) citations which contradict how old they were. As there ages are both so close to 100 there is no certainty that either of them actually reached 100. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 05:05, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
User:DerbyCountyinNZ- could you let me know which citation you are refering to? nirmal (talk) 05:57, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
The articles and article history are full of different claims for their age. Obviously no-one knows how old they really are. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 06:05, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Your reply is still ambiguous. So i am reverting your revert.nirmal (talk) 06:07, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
And you are edit warring, so I'll be taking the appropriate action. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 06:11, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

September 2020

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Hello, you are removing the edits with references without citing valid reasons. nirmal (talk) 06:12, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Wrong. I have given good reasons, you have failed to provide any counter-argument to those reasons. Don't try the tit-for-tat notifications, that won't wash. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 20:45, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
So let's clarify what has happened so far:
  1. You add 2 entries to the wrong article, in the wrong place. Not uncommon, you are not the first editor to fail to realise there is a more appropriate article, or t hat entries are listed in alphabetical order.
Agree. It was the wrong place.
  1. Having reviewed the articles for both entries, it is clear that their age is uncertain, the edit history shows that reaching 100 has been attributed multiple times in different years. The logical conclusion is that their actual age is uncertain, therefore I removed them, with an explanation.
  2. You then started a discussion on my talk page (which is inappropriate, this discussion should have been on the talk page of the article in question so that other editors could be made aware of it and contribute).
for that to occur, you should have started to discuss in the article page instead of my talk page.
  1. You reverted my removal adding back Madhav Prasad Ghimire using exactly the same reference as previously with the comment "reverting with reference". This does not address my comment that their age is uncertain. I note that you did not re-add Satya Mohan Joshi, presumably because he claimed to have been born in 1920 but other sources say 1919.
Absolutely wrong. In either case it makes them +100. I was not interested in Satya Mohan Joshi because he is still alive.
  1. As you did not address my comment in the edit summary I reverted again and issued you an edit warring notice as a precaution in case you continued to edit without address the issues I raised. I noted in my that his article as it stands at present is clearly contradictory. This is illustrated by the fact that "his hundredth birthday was celebrated all over Nepal with various programs on 23 September 2018" while the next paragraph says "He died on 18 August 2020 at the age of 100".
Yes. Because you did not provide detailed reasons to do so.
  1. You added the comment to my notice of edit warring "reverting the edit with references it not the policy of the wiki". You clearly do not understand how Wikipedia works. Just because youreference a change does not automatically mean it is allowed to stand without discussion. I have given perfectly adequate reasons why your addition was removed. Per WP:BRD any edit which is contentious should be discussed and consensus reached before the edit is allowed to stand.
this is a symptom of WP:OWN
  1. You then added the notice above. Given my patience with your editing so far that notice is bordering on farcical

If you wish to continue the discussion of whether either of these 2 poets are added to a list of centenarians article, the appropriate place is Talk:List_of_centenarians_(authors,_editors,_poets_and_journalists). I strongly recommend that before you re-add them again, you establish consensus on that talk page that they should be added. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 05:35, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Anyway. Closing the discussion. nirmal (talk)

Irrelevant?

Why are you removing edits without providing a good enough reason? How is it irrelevant to indicate the political affiliation of the mayor of a city? This is common practice in many other Wikipedia articles about cities. Please explain how it is irrelevant. --Spaastm (talk) 13:03, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

("Inappropriate" would have been better) Having since checked other cities the party affiliation is not normally added after the name. This is because it should be placed on a separate line, though it looks like this has not been used for most NZ cities.

leader_party optional Political party of the place's leader

DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 17:57, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

In New Zealand local politics, the main political parties rarely stand candidates. There are local body tickets, such as Communities and Residents (probably better known under their earlier name of Citizens and Ratepayers) or City Vision, and these sometimes have alignments to political parties but are not bound to those parties policies. Most local body tickets are not sufficiently enduring or notable to have Wikipedia articles. I think most mayors stand as independent of the local body tickets. -gadfium 23:14, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
This supports my opinion that if not entirely irrelevant then it is certainly inappropriate to include the party name after the mayor's name, and in most cases not at all. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 11:45, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Kane Tanaka.

Dear Derby, do you think her page needs protection? Multiple editors are trying to turn it into something it shouldn't be and I'm concerned about constantly reverting, due to "edit warring". Regards, MattSucci (talk) 03:35, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

The only grounds for semi-protection would be repeated BLP violations (adding content with adequate citations) or repeated distruptive editing by IPs and/or SPAs. Now that there is a citation for her being the third oldest most of the recent problems should slow down. It's still badly written though. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 04:50, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Agreed. Let's see how things progress. Regards, MattSucci (talk) 05:09, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Corbin Strong

Hello, I would just like to clarify why you said Strong winning Stage 2 of the Tour of Southland is not a major result. Thanks Paulpat99 (talk) 05:10, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Tour of Southland is not a major event, winning a stage even less so. As an international rider and world champion winning a stage in a local event is comparatively trivial. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 07:27, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Ah that makes sense thank you for clarifying. Paulpat99 (talk) 08:55, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Kane Tanaka.

Her biography is being butchered by longevity fan-boys once again. I am tired of reverting so many useless and unencyclopedic edits, as I am sure you are also. Any suggestions? MattSucci (talk) 14:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

There are multiple policies which can be used to prevent this including WP:BLP and properly applied WP:CONSENSUS. Editors who continue to violate these policies can be taken to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Longevity. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 19:01, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
I tried my best to trim and improve her page, but have been quickly reverted. So, your expert opinion is required on her talk page again. Regards, MattSucci (talk) 18:51, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Her page is full of unnecessary facts that have absolutely nothing to do with her longevity. I'm not sure how interested you are, but if a few of us could make our views clear on her talkpage again, we could remove all of that 'trash'. MattSucci (talk) 13:14, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry tagging

Hi DerbyCountyinNZ, did you create a sockpuppet investigation about Epicgueyetoofhioof somewhere? Please don't tag users without an investigation; this has no helpful effect at all. If you have sockpuppetry concerns, please voice them at SPI. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Here's a quick link to start a new section for William the enderman6713: [10] I would start one myself, as I had a sneaking suspicion about this user as well, but I don't really have any "smoking gun" diff evidence other than the timing. Ionmars10 (talk) 20:44, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
I thought I was following procedure. I used the template for a suspected sock and was then prompted with a box to create the category. If I'm not supposed to create the category why did I get the prompt? If someone else is supposed to create it, or there is some other procedure to go through the popup box should say so. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 21:42, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
What tool are you using for this? I don't see any problem with you creating the category, but I presume that it's only meant to be used in conjunction with an already-open SPI. Ionmars10 (talk) 22:28, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
The procedure is "Only blocked accounts should be tagged as Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets and only upon sufficient evidence that would stand up to scrutiny." Please use WP:SPI instead of tagging non-blocked accounts. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:36, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Ah, thanks for clarifying. Ionmars10 (talk) 22:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
No worries – reading through this, another clarification: By "tagging", I mean "adding the template". Adding the template is already not the right step to take. Without incorrectly adding the template, no prompt for creating a category is made. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:48, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict)I see! In that case [[Template:Sockpuppet]] should have a note at the top that the template should only be used for sockpuppets already under investigation and that if not already under investigation [[SPI]] should be used. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 22:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the helpful suggestion; I also figured that was probably the source of the confusion and have now/already removed that example from the documentation. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Cheers! DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 23:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

June 2021

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Succession to the British throne, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Elizium23 (talk) 05:45, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Bollocks! DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 17:53, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Please don't. The red link lets us create lists of the articles we need to work on. That film festival is one. Women in Red has an editathon coming up in August and the article will be created then or before then since we will be working on indigenous women. -Yupik (talk) 18:15, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

It would have helped if you had mentioned that the article was going to be created rather just linking it without explanation. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 04:50, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Yep, same here. — Guarapiranga ☎ 10:33, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Valentine Ligny

Dear Derby, I see that you added the notability tag to this article at the end of May, but when do you think it would be acceptable to nominate it for deletion? Regards, MattSucci (talk) 06:55, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Immediately! DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 07:12, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Done! MattSucci (talk) 07:37, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Thumbs up icon

Deletion denied. Apparently, but I'm not sure how, she meets Wikipedia's GNG guidelines. Regards, MattSucci (talk) 15:02, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Afd it is then. How tedious. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 21:50, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Can you arrange that? I'm out of my depth with such things. Regards, MattSucci (talk) 04:42, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Will try and find time, Olympics is a very busy time for me. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 05:33, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

If you find time, maybe you could add some of your wisdom to the discussion @ Talk:Supercentenarians from France regards, MattSucci (talk) 19:04, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lisa Carrington, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greatest of All Time. 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) 06:00, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Lucile Randon + Valentine Ligny

If you get a chance, your opinion is required @ Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valentine Ligny & Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lucile Randon MattSucci (talk) 14:40, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Lucy Hannah

I know Lucy Hannah got debunked. I was just testing to see how quickly it would be removed.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 00sClassicGamerFan (talk • contribs) 23:31, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Do it again and I'll take you to ANI for disruptive editing. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 23:57, 7 September 2021 (UTC)