Hi Electricmemory! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Learn more about editing
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
Get help at the Teahouse
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Volunteer at the Task Center
Happy editing! GoldRomean (talk) 01:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you!!! Electricmemory (talk) 21:06, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Electricmemory! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of 2025 Potomac River mid-air collision several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.
All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:2025 Potomac River mid-air collision, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. EoRdE6(Talk) 03:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @EoRdE6 I'm guessing I misread what it actually said. If it said the correct thing then my fault. I assumed it didn't.Electricmemory (talk) 03:35, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:3RR applies regardless of whether your edit right or wrong so just be careful EoRdE6(Talk) 03:37, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I get it okay, my fault, you can stop now Electricmemory (talk) 03:39, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Btw I didn’t ever edit anything I only fix the 2 incidents that happened on January 28 because it was mentioned twice. Thanks you for your concerns. AVA Navigate (talk) 05:38, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @AVA Navigate Huh? Electricmemory (talk) 05:39, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- In 2025 Aviation it mentioned me for a non-constructive edit from ivebeenhacked and also mention your name and it sent me here when I wanted to (talk) AVA Navigate (talk) 05:43, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Anyways I meant to be talking to ivebeenhacked I guess. AVA Navigate (talk) 05:47, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Zhuhai Jinwan Airport, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sanbao Township. 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) 07:55, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed Electricmemory (talk) 17:40, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Electricmemory, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Izaan Qureshi, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Would not requre a fundamental rewrite. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 20:19, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Electricmemory, given your short tenure with this account, you may want to dial back the lectures to long-term editors on how to edit effectively.-- Ponyobons mots 20:32, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, what is this in reference to? Electricmemory (talk) 20:33, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Your entire conversation at User talk:Cannolis.-- Ponyobons mots 20:37, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm sorry, I wasn't meaning to lecture anyone. Electricmemory (talk) 20:38, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- You templated them and then proceeded to lecture them on how to patrol vandalism and warn others. You also stated in that conversation that you have a history of your reports at AIV being declined because you hadn't left enough warnings, despite the fact that you have only actually ever made two reports to AIV with this account, neither of which have even been actioned as of the time I'm writing this. If this is some sort of clean start, you need to slow down.-- Ponyobons mots 20:45, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, my mistake. I'm sorry. Electricmemory (talk) 20:48, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm going to second this, as I'm also a longtime editor who doesn't appreciate being lectured to by a newbie either. There's no rule that disabling categories on draft pages is mandatory while removing them outright is forbidden — they're both valid responses, and are both useful in different circumstances.
- For one thing, the kind of newbies who don't understand that drafts aren't allowed to be in categories quite frequently also didn't put the categories where categories are supposed to be — drafts often have their categories placed somewhere in the middle instead of at the end, or in multiple different places within the article (e.g. I frequently come across drafts where somebody used something like ==[[Category:Biography]]==, ==[[Category:Career]]== or ==[[Category:Personal life]]== as the section headers).
- Or they place drafts in redlinked categories that don't even exist at all, or in categories that the page wouldn't belong in even if it were a finished article (e.g. filing a musician directly in Category:Music) — but those always have to be removed rather than disabled, because if the page gets moved with a bad category on it then I'm still going to have to come in for another round of category cleanup again in the future. So even if I'm just disabling categories, I still have to remove some regardless, because a bad category like that needs to come off now rather than waiting for me to have to make a return visit to the same page days or weeks later, so I would have to take even more extra time to assess whether each individual category needs to be removed or just disabled.
- So removing categories just entails hitting a few minus signs in HotCat, while disabling categories requires reviewing each individual category and then searching through the page to find it, which means that just disabling categories can take up to five or six times longer than just removing them. Sure, it doesn't seem like that much of a burden to take the extra time if you're just thinking about the one or two drafts you saw — but the thing you need to understand is that because the reports for categorized draft and user pages only run once per week, I have to clean up several hundred of them at a time, meaning that it's already a two or three hour job as it is, and would become a ten to twenty hour job if I did it the longer way. But needless to say, I don't have a responsibility to devote that much time to it, and am entitled to get it done the quicker way.
- Sure, if you come across one categorized draft in the process of other editing, then feel free to just disable the categories, because the little bit of extra time involved won't be an excessive burden on your time — but when I'm having to deal with a batch of hundreds of categorized drafts all at once, investing that same little bit of extra time on every page in the entire batch would add up to an extreme burden on my time. Bearcat (talk) 14:47, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there. Probably easier just to nuke all the COI edits. Cheers! Magnolia677 (talk) 21:29, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @Magnolia677 I was already halfway asleep when I came across that mess, I didn't wish to nuke something I wasn't certain about. Thanks for handling it yourself :) Electricmemory (talk) 11:26, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
