User talk:MoonlightVector/Archive 3

August - September 2021 Archive

August 2021

Information icon Hello, I'm Chetsford. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to realtor.com have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Chetsford (talk) 05:44, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That was more simply a fix until i could work it out. But then a hurricane hit so i couldnt fix it.
Not like i know how to do stuff MoonlightVector 13:06, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, im loney. Do you ever just get sad. 13:34, 17 September (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ma Ceres P. Doyo

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Ma Ceres P. Doyo requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ‒overthrows 16:41, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing that. MoonlightVector 16:42, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Luchy Donalds

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Luchy Donalds, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Kazamzam (talk) 19:28, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That was me requesting it. MoonlightVector 19:29, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Genocide of Christians in North Korea

Your handling of this article was very poor. First, you nominate it for deletion. Then, at the AfD, based on comments by the author, you close the AfD that you opened. Finally, you tag the article with two criteria, neither of which applies. Consider this a warning. If you do anything like, or similar to, this again, you risk being blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:13, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

You did not respond? How you can edit without source? Syed89 (talk) 16:41, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Its called reverting. Also you cant get me to stop, because im the one who is trying to stop you from vandalizing MoonlightVector 16:43, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like the edit you reverted has been reverted by an admin as unsourced. Maybe you should be less aggressive toward other editors? You need to know the difference between a good faith mistake and vandalism. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:22, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I keep hearing your, "cant get me to stop," in my head. This is scary. You've had two admins on your talk page questioning your edits. I think you need to take a deep breath and reassess. When someone calls you on a mistake, doubling down is disruptive. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:30, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Look this happen like 3 times before. Im tired of doing this type of stuff MoonlightVector 18:33, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLP

Hello, Why did you revert this edit [1]? Please read WP:BLP. Birth dates should not be included in an article unless supported by a reliable source. I did a five second check of the first source given in the article, https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/hitesh-tesher-sharma-viral-tiktok-song-young-shahrukh-1.5878975, which clearly states in the first sentence that he was 25 years old at the time the article was published (2021), so obviously the birth year of 1999 is wrong. Please slow down, check what you're doing and be more careful. Multiple administrators (both here and in your talk page archives) have warned you to stop editing in administrative areas until you have more experience, please listen to what is being said. Thanks, 192.76.8.74 (talk) 18:56, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That isnt an administrative area, also you didn't cite the site. MoonlightVector 19:21, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
So a couple of things
  1. By "administrative areas" I'm refering to the stuff that you're doing that isn't involved with content creation, like draftifying articles and antivandalism work. You're making a lot of mistakes in this area and creating a lot of mess for other people to clean up. Another example, why did you draftify Ma Ceres P. Doyo? It was created as a reasonable stub with a number of sources, and rather than letting them finish what was obviously a WIP article you draftified it. when asked by the editor to explain why you'd draftified it Here you basically refused. On Talk:Ma Ceres P. Doyo you discuss how you think the article is too short - that doesn't apply to a paragraph long article with 6 sources! If you can't back up your draftifications with policy then don't do them!
    1. On that note, why on earth are you draftifying blank pages? If an editor blanks an article they wrote and hasn't re-added any content after a reasonable time (normally about 10 mins) then tag it for WP:G7 deletion using {{db-blanked}}.
  2. I am not the same editor as the person who removed the text.
  3. READ the policy I linked, especially the section on WP:Burden. As the editor reinserting contested content it is your job to provide citations supporting it, it is not the responsibility of the editor removing it to provide citations showing it is wrong. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 19:50, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok but one more thing, should you be on your main? MoonlightVector 19:51, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have an account, I've been editing as an IP for years. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 19:52, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article Reassessment

Hey, I see that you judged that Vere Bird Jr. no longer satisfies the Good Article Criteria. If you see a listed GA that has fallen below the standard, you can start the Good Article Reassessment process; the instructions are on that page. This gives other editors the chance to weigh in on the matter before it's decided, and it creates a record of the thought process that led to the delisting. Thanks for your attention to Good Articles! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 12:18, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

-bjjc

Hi, please don't feed the troll. :) Also, there's a difference between banning and blocking. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:28, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was just pointing out the stuff, also yeah i do use both interchangeably MoonlightVector 17:29, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

G3 of Jay Prakash

Slightly baffled by your G3 nomination of Jay Prakash: the only content in that page was just the article title. Did you mean to nominate it under A3? Sdrqaz (talk) 19:23, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

G3 due to it just saying 2 words, falls under A3 too MoonlightVector 19:23, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unless those two words are slurs or profanities, I'd go for A3. G3 is for blatant vandalism or hoaxes. Sdrqaz (talk) 19:37, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also this page could also be removed due to the user who made it is about to get removed due to page move vandalism MoonlightVector 19:41, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If someone's been engaging in page move vandalism, that doesn't mean all their edits have to be reverted or all their pages have to be deleted. If they're an editor doing something in violation of a block or ban, then their creations may be eligible under G5, but that's it. Sdrqaz (talk) 19:50, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
MoonlightVector, Sdrqaz is absolutely right. G3 was the wrong tag.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:26, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Budget vandalism

You reverted too far[2] and repeated vandalism of the budget range in the Infobox. Please correct this error. The article is locked otherwise I would have fixed it already. -- 109.78.202.99 (talk)

Cease

Do not revert my edits on Chechil. Read my edit summary. My edits are justified. Monegasque100 (talk) 19:39, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Im taking sides with the admin here. MoonlightVector 19:40, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What admin?--Bbb23 (talk) 20:02, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
DENY for now. wikinights talk 19:44, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal level is broken

Hey! I just wanna make sure that you knew that your vandalism level thing is broken. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#0001 20:02, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah i did know for a while. It was a part of my archive which i restored recently. MoonlightVector 20:05, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

About Wtsw77393ijkeowijweepd

Hey! I just thought I'd let you know that this user is most likely an LTA. You can ask ferret for more info as the user's actions are exactly the same as another user's from last night. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#0001 15:02, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello MoonlightVector, regarding your note in Special:Diff/1046018602 ("But why? No warns just why?"), can you explain? At the time I blocked this user there were already three warnings on the talk page, as seen here: Special:PermaLink/1045936981. Please ping if replying on this page. — xaosflux Talk 15:21, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature

Hello, I'm afraid the use of an image in your signature is in breach of Wikipedia policy, specifically WP:SIGIMAGE, which explicitly states, in bold, "Images of any kind must not be used in signatures". You could replace it with a Unicode special character but you cannot continue to display an image in your signature. Please change it before you sign any more posts. Thank you, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:32, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thats dumb. Now i have to figure out a character. MoonlightVector 19:07, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I redesigned it to be better MoonlightVectorTalk page 19:43, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CSD

Hi MoonlightVector, I hope you are doing well. I just wanted to pop by to ask you to please be a bit more careful when nominating pages for speedy deletion. Draft:KAPOOR KUMA AKA BOBBY THAKUR, which you nominated as an attack page, was a copy-paste of a highly promotional press release; I have deleted it as a copyright violation, but it was definitely ineligible for G10 deletion. I have also declined your request to delete Draft:Jameel Moosa under the rationale Notability Guidelines (see Wikipedia:Notability). Lack of notability is not a criterion for deletion on its own (see WP:CSDNOT no. 4), and the notability-related criteria A7, A9 and A11 do not apply in draftspace. Thanks in advance, please let me know if you have any questions. --Blablubbs (talk) 13:29, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Careful

Hi MoonlightVector, While your intentions were no doubt good, you made a legal threat against a problematic editor. I've removed the threat. We don't do that here, see WP:LEGAL. Just follow normal processes. This is not a "dangerous" person, just a problematic one. I'm watching their contributions now. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:31, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:English Bulldogs

Hello, MoonlightVector,

Just a reminder that every time you tag a page for deletion (CSD, PROD, AFD/RFD/MFD/etc.), you need to post a notice on the talk page of the page creator. I see you use Twinkle, which is great, so just make sure that you have your Preferences set up to "Notify page creator" and that all CSD criteria boxes are checked. Sometimes the default Twinkle setting is to only have a couple of the speedy deletion criteria checked but page creators should be notified no matter what the criteria for speedy deletion is. Thanks for your work. Liz Read! Talk! 02:06, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was checked but for some reason it didn't go through. MoonlightVectorTalk page 12:22, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CopyPatrol – intrawiki copying

Thanks for helping out at CopyPatrol. Friendly tip: if you see an edit that copies text from another article without providing the required attribution as detailed at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia, please make a dummy edit to provide the attribution and then let the editor know about it on their talk page with {{uw-copying}} so they don't make the same mistake in the future. DanCherek (talk) 17:35, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]