User talk:EllieTea

Welcome!

Hello, EllieTea, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Hudson Street (TV series). I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! SchuminWeb (Talk) 11:48, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

August 2014

Thank you for your edit to the disambiguation page IPSA. However, please note that disambiguation pages are not articles; rather, they are meant to help readers find a specific article quickly and easily. From the disambiguation dos and don'ts, you should:

• Be familiar with the guidelines and style
• Only list articles that readers might reasonably be looking for
• Use short sentence fragment descriptions, with no punctuation at the end
• Use exactly one navigable link ("blue link") in each entry
  • Only add a "red link" if used in an article, and include the "blue link" to that article
• Do not pipe links (unless style requires it) – keep the full title of the article visible
• Do not insert external links or references

Hi Ellie, Pls can you stop adding that entry to this disambiguation page (dab). Several editors have reverted you. We don't add external links to dab pages, and repeating that causing others to repeatedly remove it may be disruptive. Before editing a dab page again, you may want to make yourself aware of WP:MOSDAB (overview WP:DABYESNO). On the same dab, you removed [1] a valid article (which just needed the initialism added to the article, per MOSDAB), and other issues on at least one more Brigadoon (disambiguation). Pls stop. I hope these links help you with dab editing, keep up the editing, regards Widefox; talk 21:50, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(This is the first time that I have signed on since August.)

Thanks for pointing out the issues with disambiguation pages. I was unaware of the policy, and will try to follow the guidelines in the future.

EllieTea (talk) 23:32, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributions to the Emma Sulkowicz talk page

Not really a place to throw in your opinion on the case. Read all of the references more carefully, like this one. --A21sauce (talk) 20:16, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are not really that stupid, are you?   EllieTea (talk) 23:41, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mattress Performance: Carry That Weight

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

Sarah (SV) ^(talk) 18:40, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

April 2015

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page.I've noticed that your editing focuses largely on claims of false rape accusation - this being the case, I urge you to consider whether you are on Wikipedia to build an encyclopedia, or to Right Great Wrongs. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:12, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your approach to this is not the way to discuss good-faith edits, which I believe I well justified. EllieTea (talk) 03:19, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:02, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

--SonicY (talk) 17:32, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

April 2015

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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 BRD 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 your 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. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:29, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MRM article probation

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Men's rights movement, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Talk:Men's rights movement/Article probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is necessarily any problem with your edits. Thank you. --SonicY (talk) 14:16, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

EllieTea has never edited Men's rights movement ― Padenton|✉   11:39, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The linked page specifies that the sanctions apply to articles on the topic, not just to the individual article. False accusation of rape, Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight), and Campus rape, the almost-exclusive areas of EllieTea's contributions, obviously fall under this heading, since claiming high numbers of false rape accusations and opposing anti-rape efforts is a cause célèbre of "men's rights" activists. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:57, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's completely baseless, and there is no reason EllieTea is not allowed to participate in articles. The False accusation of rape article already explains several high numbers of false rape accusations, thoroughly sourced. Take the soapbox elsewhere. And conflating disagreement with opposing anti-rape efforts is entirely fallacious. ― Padenton|✉   15:05, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since it overlaps a bit with your complaint, you might want to view Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Roscelese. Liz ^Read! Talk! 17:23, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I have left a short statement there (Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Statement_by_EllieTea).  EllieTea (talk) 23:13, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mentioned

Though you're aware of the AE filing, please note that I'm proposing to notify several people including you about a possible sanction on future edits at False accusation of rape. See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Result concerning Roscelese. You can respond if you wish. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 14:51, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, EllieTea. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, EllieTea. 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)[reply]

Tommy Robinson

In your article about Tommy Robinson you state that tommy is far-right. How do you know his political stand point? WorkingClassFrost (talk) 09:13, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is not my article, and I did not state that. (I just added a couple paragraphs, near the end.) FWIW, I do not believe that Robinson is far right, though many people do claim that he is. EllieTea (talk) 09:26, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018

Your recent editing history at Tommy Robinson (activist) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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. Doug Weller talk 15:44, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note that although you've been here over nine years, you are still inexperienced and unlike the editors at that article you may not know about this. Doug Weller talk 15:47, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but I did only a single revert. Moreover, the edit summary for my revert asked the other editor to "kindly follow WP:BRD". Anyway, I will certainly be extra careful! EllieTea (talk) 15:55, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, EllieTea. 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)[reply]

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) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Revista Ibérica de Aracnología

The article Revista Ibérica de Aracnología has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Randykitty (talk) 13:57, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]