This is an archive of past discussions with User:TheTechie. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi TheTechie. Unfortunately, I have just closed your RfC early for a failure to follow WP:RFCBEFORE. I know this is probably disheartening to hear, and I don't want to discourage you. But the RfC encountered immediate and overwhelming negative feedback. I think that could have been avoided if the RfC had been better workshopped ahead of time. That could have allowed you to appropriately understand issues like Unified Login, or the other issues that editors raised. First raising and workshopping the issue so that you at least understand the issue better allows you to create a better RfC (i.e. one with a better, but rarely guaranteed, chance of success). I think any editor who has been around a while has inherently created an RfC that they look back and think "D'oh!" I know that I have created some not so great RfC's (for example, I created a sports RfC at one point...despite not knowing anything about sports...that went over pretty poorly). I hope this can be a learning moment, and I'm sorry to have to be the bearer of bad news. CaptainEekEdits Ho Cap'n!⚓05:42, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
RfC talkpage? I'm not sure what you're referring to. If you mean WT:RFC, that's probably not as helpful as a more well seen, or more topic specific, venue. One of the advantages of say asking at a place like the talk for the policy you're trying to change is that you'll get the page watchers of the policy, who have probably been involved in previous RfCs on the subject. They might still bristle at the idea, but they can at least usually give you a sense of key opposition arguments you will need to consider, or other unforseen issues. In my experience, they'll usually provide some helpful clarification to the RfC wording. CaptainEekEdits Ho Cap'n!⚓19:24, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi The Techie, Not sure if you are still interest in CVUA program as you have not answer the last 3 question on assignment 1. If you have any problem regarding the assignment, pls let me know or if you are not interest in the program any more, then also let me know. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeiatalk01:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick reply and ping me on the program page at the "communication section" at the bottom of the assignment when you have done with assignment 1. Stay safe and have a good weekend. Cassiopeiatalk01:40, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi TheTechie, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.
This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:
Hi! You seem to have gone on a recent binge of A7 nominations; some of those seem to be OK, but ... do please understand that A7 only applies when there is no credible claim of significance in the page. This is a much lower threshold than notability – any claim of significance is enough to invalidate the tag. I've declined several of them, left some for others to review. Take care, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:49, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
TheTechie, for what's been deleted, please see here. I may have been wrong, perhaps none of the A7 tags were really fully justified – I deleted an A1 and a G11, and declined some A7s. Take care, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Minor edits checkbox
Hi TheTechie :) Just FYI, the minor edits checkbox has a specific meaning on Wikipedia, and refers to edits that could never be subject to a dispute/that only make superficial changes to the page. By my understanding, edits such as this wouldn't meet the criteria to be classed as minor. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow]11:09, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
@MicrobiologyMarcus Yeah, I was wondering why after I applied a CSD G11 tag, it changed into a redirect. All good though, thanks for checking with me. Done in regards to CSD tagging.
It notified me, because when I moved the page, I left behind a redirect. The software credits me with that page creation and Twinkle identifies me as the page creator to notify when leaving the CSD talk page message. Pretty standard, just a weird edge case as a result of the edit conflict. Good patrol otherwise, well done. Cheers! microbiologyMarcus[petri dish·growths]00:47, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Blaze
FWIW, it's possible Blaze didn't know you aren't an admin. As far as I can tell, you made the only comments on their page that seemed to be threatening a block. It's probably best for you to stay out of fraught discussions. Valereee (talk) 17:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, didn't mean it that way. Was trying to get them to cool down after the types of remarks they made at admins. I should probably add a (Non-administrator comment) to discussions like this. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/$23:18, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Seeking Guidance on Republishing Sergey Smbatyan's Article on Wikipedia
Hey @TheTechie, thanks for your willingness to help me to improve the Wikipedia. I would be more than thankful, if you guide me how to improve the article and republish it. Thanks in advance. Grigor Khachatrian (talk) 20:37, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
You asked on Liz's talk page how to make it sound less like an ad. I would remove/change this line so the submission reads less like an ad:
He actively engages in international performances and is dedicated to revitalizing classical music audiences while promoting contemporary classical music on a global scale.
Also, you need much more reliable sources to show notability.
Also @Grigor Khachatrian cite note 15 cannot be multiple sources. Split it into multiple citations. That is all. Like I said, please let me know when you're ready to submit, and you'll get a review (by someone else). thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/$14:19, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Dear @TheTechie, thanks for your guidance, it will make the article more neutral, change the multiple citations, and also remove the parts that has been review by AI assistant. And then let you know, thanks so much. Grigor Khachatrian (talk) 14:44, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
You found a cookie!
Asheiou has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!
TheTechie has eaten your {{subst:cookie}}! The cookie made her happy and she'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{subst:cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!
@TheTechie, this is CSM, an AFC patroller. Just for clarity, I was reviewing the article and found that you had denied twice. From my perspective, the user is failing to address the issues you said on comments. Also he was adding few sources, still not making upto the mark on qualifying this article. I have one question. Is social media (YT, X (twitter), etc.) may not fill the criteria? ☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔)04:51, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Yes, Twitter and FB, etc. are considered self published sources, so you cannot count them as reliable. If they keep ignoring the AFC comments, feel free to reject the draft, meaning that they cannot resubmit it further (assuming you are an AFC reviewer and have AFC helper, you can just use the decline option, select "reject", then select the option that says "subject is not notable". It'll post a message saying "this subject is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia".) Feel free to reply with any more questions and thanks for patrolling.
Hello there, I wanted to use "apple.com" as my citation but I was worried its a broad web page and doesn't cover only the iPad, even in the iPad subsection... By the way, what are canned edit summaries? Dulton100 (talk) 17:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Please stop commenting at the Talk pages of blocked socks. It's not helpful, and in some cases what you say is incorrect. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:44, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
You've continued to do this after this message, as well as inappropriately tagging an unblocked user as a sock. Please stop. You are not experienced enough to be dealing with these sorts of issues. Spicy (talk) 01:57, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
This is very similar to what I was getting at in the ANI thread where you continued to post on an indefinitely banned user's talk page, requiring that user's talk page access to be revoked. It's unhelpful and disruptive and would be used against you in any RfA. BoldGnome (talk) 02:23, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Your attempts to demonstrate your abilities as an administrator hopeful are disruptive and not isolated to commenting on the pages of blocked sock puppets. BoldGnome (talk) 02:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
I'm just very confused because I was told by an experienced admin in the case of Lkomdis that there was nothing wrong with my edits, please stop blaming a user who is just trying to help this encylopedia, regardless of account age. The Blade of Northern Lights clearly said: I don't see anything wrong with what TheTechie did here, it was Lkomdis who made things weird. Who knows what I might do next, I might just leave Wikipedia, all things considered. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/$02:41, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
@Bbb23 @Spicy Sorry about the mishap today, for both writing on a sock talk page (I should've done it on the sockmaster) and the template thing (I got confused as the template "an editor has raised a concern"). My bad. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/$02:33, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
The issue isn't that you posted on the sock's talk page instead of the sockmaster's. You should not be making a habit of commenting on the talk pages of blocked users. Spicy (talk) 03:52, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Is using your own opinions in Wikipedia articles vandalism, cause someone did it in the Photomath Wikipedia Article. The first line in the article's description appears to be the person's opinion of the app, since there's no citation and proof of that person's statement. I don't know if that's enough to judge if that's a personal opinion. Dulton100 (talk) 20:24, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Yes, vandalism, I've reverted the IP and blocked them. They're a proxy that hasn't done anything constructive in their life.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
You should also avoid lurking on admin talk pages to offer incorrect advice as you did here. Giving the wrong information is worse than providing nothing at all. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
The fastest way to get an admin response if you want to move a draft over a main space redirect is, using Twinkle, select CSD>G6 Move and put the name of the page to be moved in the available field. That provides a link to the draft and with one click, an admin can delete the redirect and move the draft with the same edit, rather than going to the draft page and using the page move option. It's just much easier for the patrolling admin. Thank you. LizRead!Talk!02:15, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Liz, That's strange, that's what I thought I did. I added the draft name after clicking CSD>G6-AFC Move. Please let me know if I did something wrong. — thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/$02:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
