and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Beeblebrox (talk) 22:17, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Re: LGBT topic
I have no idea about your question on my talk page, the userbox is just expressing that person individual view only, but doesn't mean the users is a LGBTphobia, since Wikipedia is a worldwide encyclopedia project which accommodated variety kind of editors individual expression. If you're interested contributions of writing some particular event that's relevant to LGBT people or LGBT artists with providing the WP:RS onto the articles project, you're welcome. However, please note that Wikipedia isn't the place for you to advocating your sexual orientation, read more about the WP:NOT policies and guidelines. SA 13 Bro (talk) 11:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The AfD for Letha Weapons is still open. While it is open, the article should not be removed. Please stop moving the page, and let editors reach a consensus about what to do. • Gene93k (talk) 23:43, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you got your article back. Apparently, not every editor thinks AFC reviews are helpful but that is still what I would recommend, reviewers can often spot problems that page creators may miss.
And I just wanted to say that if you had accepted my original offer to restore this draft back on January 18th, you wouldn't have had to spend the past two weeks discussing this at Deletion Review. I think editors who turn to noticeboards have mixed results but it is almost always going to be a big investment of your time and mental energy going through the arguments on them. I keep my distance from them unless I'm called to comment on a situation. Good luck with your content work, I really do mean that. LizRead!Talk!01:31, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Polycarpa aurata I was just reading COIN to catch up on what I've missed/I'm missing due to an irl issue that's taking a great deal of my time and noticed you brought up something at COIN while you have less than 200 edits. I do not mention that as a negative thing, just wanted to say I am greatly impressed by a new editor being able to manage such a complex noticeboard and remain civil, continuing to assume good faith, and arguing eloquently your perspective (no judgement from my part on the actual thread, I'm staying uninvolved with that discussion). I hope the thread won't discourage you from participating in COIN and other noticeboards, and hope similarly to have productive interactions with you in article space in the future. And as I always tell new editors, if there is any question, concern, or issue you want some help with feel free to {{ping}} me or start a section in my user page. Enjoy the rest of the week :) PS: what is the origin of your user name, if you don't mind me asking? A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me!22:00, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A. C. Santacruz, thank you. I will probably take you up on your offer to field questions. When I wanted to change my username, I was not allowed to have the one I wanted, so I used the name of the page I was reading at the time. Polycarpa aurata (talk) 22:18, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On 6 February 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article John Wayne Bobbitt Uncut, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that John Wayne Bobbitt Uncut was the bestselling pornographic film of 1994 and had the most rentals that year in the United States? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/John Wayne Bobbitt: Uncut. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, John Wayne Bobbitt Uncut), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
I just wanted to echo the statement made by A. C. Santacruz above that I do think you have managed to do extraordinarily well on Wikipedia for a newcomer. Before anyone else has the chance, I wanted to be the first person to award you a barnstar for your outstanding record thus far on the project. –MJL‐Talk‐☖06:07, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
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 articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. 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.
To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.
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.
To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.
I don't mean to be argumentative, but surely that isn't meant to apply to biographical pages? I have never seen a biography here that didn't have the date of birth. How can someone be notable enough to merit a page here but not notable enough that we wouldn't put their full date of birth? Polycarpa aurata (talk) 02:35, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To state the obvious your plastering of the unnecessarily person's details all over WP:BLPN was not what I intended, and additionally it has now been taken to AfD. To say I am not happy with how you have done this would be an understatement. Djm-leighpark (talk) 11:13, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I need to claim I have received a (non public) email from oversight on Ticket#2022032710000821 sent Sun, 27 Mar 2022 06:57:39 which has informed me: "They are completely correct; if there is a reliable source that provides a DOB, there is no *procedural* reason to remove it, only one based on discussion and consensus." Unfortunately I have read that email just now, some 30 hours later. On that basis I need to revert the full DOB and stand back from that point. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 11:40, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Previous accounts
My analysis of your contributions indicates some probability you may have edited Wikipedia previously under another account; though that is by no means certain. If so can you please name accounts you have edited under previously or do you wish to claim WP:CLEANSTART. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 11:13, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Djm-leighpark: I don't know what "analysis" you've done, but I joined Wikipedia just after Christmas. I signed on today to find a flood of vaguely threatening message from you. Is all of this just because I added a birth date to Monisha Shah? Polycarpa aurata (talk) 15:27, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Polycarpa aurata: I won't say what I have done or not done in terms of analysis, but there are indicators (not proof) that for obvious reasons I will not reveal as it would assist blocked users circumvating blocks (that is not to imply you are one of those). That has had significant roll on consequences to my RL and has resulted in my trying to recover a situation of a relative failing to attend a Hospital X-Ray appointment that I got problems from. This is "my fault". You will observe that at the BLPN others have chosen to remove the date of birth entirely, though there does appear to be evidence elseone has uncovered that the Times newspaper has published her age annually on her birthday for the years 2017 to 2020 at least on the basis of her Chairwomanship of Rose Bruford College of Theatre and Performance in their "Birthdays today" section which may stick as widely published by WP:RS. If that doesn't satisfy the BLPN/RS (and other jockeys) then a whole load of WP:Wikipedia:Revision deletion's really need to be requested. Now with regards to the question, which you didn't directly answer, but I have to AGF that was unintentional, I am led to understand you first joined Wikipedia just after Christmas 2021 and have not edited Wikipedia previously. If you are concerned I'm not following Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers you may wish to take me to WP:ANI but I assure you your actions and my actions would be subjected to intense scrutiny but even if I am wrong I might reasonably to thought to be persuing a presumption of privacy. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 16:16, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It comes with the territory of editing in Wikipedia. When you end up discussing issues at the noticeboards and you are a new editor people will usually make inquiries. It's annoying, certainly, and might feel personally hurtful at first, but once you start seeing it happen a bunch to others you understand why it happens. In any case, there is really nothing Djm can do if you say "I have not edited before Christmas 2021 and have no other accounts", which I imagine is what you meant by your above message. There's no need to make it more of a discussion that it needs to be. Djm-leighpark you probably could've just let the message above suffice. In any case, Polycarpa just answer plainly and let's all move on :D A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me!17:38, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but I don't need to play silly word games with someone who has suddenly taken an interest in me and started leaving me indecipherable accusations about his relative's xrays. I've had just about enough of this. Polycarpa aurata (talk) 17:59, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Polycarpa aurata:: Because I screwed up in cancelling it early dealing with your privacy pushing which has cascaded out pushing a lot of other issues. I've also threatened a complaint against a hospital over failure to handle something. That's my fault but its affecting other people in real life. Yes that's my problem. And you've done everything but answered the straightforward question. Is there something your're not telling us? Now have your last word. I likely not to respond to it. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 18:43, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry that you chose to put Wikipedia ahead of your relative's health but perhaps this experience it will encourage you to reflect on your priorities. I *have* answered your question but you are unwilling to accept it at face value. I should probably just take A. C. Santacruz's advice but I don't react well to people like you and I'm not going to give you the satisfaction of browbeating me into playing your game. Good luck with your spy hunting! Polycarpa aurata (talk) 14:24, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't choose to do and wouldn't choose to do that. Life happens. Accidents Happen. You still haven't answered the question. And in case you are wondering I was dragged into this one yesterday: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BarehamOliver. So "Spy hunting" is no joke. I actually am on Wikipedia to do contact. As a spin-off there is sometimes some learning to come out of the BLPN and it is actually useful to study it closely. Very closely. And hold the DOB has been removed and re-instated by various parties. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:40, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I believe a reasonable person would understand "I joined Wikipedia just after Christmas" as an answer to your question and would have no difficulty figuring out if it was an affirmative or a negative response. I would be interested to know what that same reasonable person makes of "I actually am on Wikipedia to do contact" because it means nothing to me. Polycarpa aurata (talk) 14:53, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop this Djm-leighpark. Either open an SPI or walk away. At this point the answer to "have you edited as another user" is "no". It shouldn't matter if this user has said yes, or no. If you have direct proof, then it should be pushed to SPI. All this is doing is causing a fight, Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski(talk • contribs)15:18, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Polycarpa aurata! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Tops Friendly Markets 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:Tops Friendly Markets, 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. While I agree with your removals as I do not think we should be glorifying a suspected mass murderer in the aftermath of an event in which they are the suspect, I just wanted to make sure you're aware of WP:3RR, as you're currently at the limit on Tops Friendly Markets.. Sideswipe9th (talk) 16:13, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers. I'd hate to see you subject to a temporary block for breaching 3RR, as I do agree with you on the removal of that content. Sideswipe9th (talk) 16:17, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm Whpq. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sharon Lee Williams that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Calling another editor racist whether explicitly or implicitly as you did here is not acceptable.Whpq (talk) 18:25, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sharon Lee Williams
I see you have recently created the article Sharon Lee Williams without going through the Articles for creation process. AFC allows other editors to ascertain that a new draft/article is qualified to appear in the "main space" of Wikipedia, and to guide its creator to enable it to qualify for mainspace. You have created your article for Sharon directly into mainspace, with only one supporting reference, which may be an interview. Wikipedia subjects must be notable according to the article at that blue link, and notability on Wikipedia comes only from reliable sources. Please read WP:YFA for more about getting an article on Wikipedia and making sure it stays there.--Quisqualis (talk) 01:44, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Based on the absence of reliable sources in the article, I've tagged it for speedy deletion, lest it bypass review due to being created directly. It's happened before, and tends to create work for others. Thanks for your indulgence.--Quisqualis (talk) 03:33, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sharon Lee Williams 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.
On 3 August 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Stanley Stair, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that at 107 years old, Stanley Stair of Jamaica was at the time of his death the last surviving Caribbean veteran of World War I? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Stanley Stair. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Stanley Stair), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 13 August 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Thomas Yarborough, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1948, Thomas Yarborough became the first African American to be elected as a city council member in California? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Thomas Yarborough. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Thomas Yarborough), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
