User talk:Theparties

Automatic invitation to visit WP:Teahouse sent by HostBot

Teahouse logo

Hi Theparties! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Osarius (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse
This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:42, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. Thank you.


DYK for The Magical Delights of Stevie Nicks

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:03, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Handmade brooms
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Banaue Philippines Handmade-brooms-01.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 09:48, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ifugao Tribesman
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Banaue Philippines Ifugao-Tribesman-01.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 09:49, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Love it. fabulous.--11:42, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Sasheer Zamata

Thanks from the DYK project and I Victuallers (talk) 00:02, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Batad Village
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Banaue Philippines Batad-Rice-Terraces-02.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:02, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Imelda (film)

Orlady (talk) 05:17, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Magical Delights of Stevie Nicks DYK

Thanks for nominating the episode article for DYK! Since it was approved, it became the second most viewed DYK article in January 2014 and was ranked 731 on WPTV's popular pages, which, you'll notice does not include many (if any) episode articles! Thanks again! — Wyliepedia 18:42, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Common walnut
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Juglans regia 2009 G2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:55, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Fernanda Lima

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Kasubi Tombs
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Kampala Kasubi Tombs.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 18:09, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Orlando Quevedo

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:02, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dom Justo Takayama

Nice work on the article. FYI, per the rules, an article may only be featured once per year (there are a few exceptions for holidays and observances), so I removed the article from February 4, leaving it on February 3. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 19:09, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Platoon Sergeant
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Drill instructor at the Officer Candidate School.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:47, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

March 2014

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for inappropriately marking edits as minor. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 12:20, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
When this current block expires, be aware that you are very likely to be blocked for edit warring if you continue your activities at Philippines. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 12:26, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am going to address why I mark all my edits as minor. There is a tendency I have to get into fights with other people and I just don't want that. Marking them minor makes me avoid these. It's not to be rude, no offence.--Theparties (talk) 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes, marking all of your edits "minor" does mean fewer people will see them. This is exactly why marking all of your edits as "minor" is not acceptable. - SummerPhD (talk) 19:20, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm sorry, I did not thought it was a big deal because I had been doing it for four months and no one complained until now. Fine, I am not going to do it again.--♥ 00:02, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
No one complained?[1][2][3] - SummerPhD (talk) 00:48, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! I forgot about that one in December. Fine. I'm stopping. You win.--♥ 00:51, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Imelda (film)

The article Imelda (film) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Imelda (film) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 16:21, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your new signature

Can you please change your signature so that it contains your username? A heart symbol doesn't really help people in identifying who you are. Sᴠᴇɴ Mᴀɴɢᴜᴀʀᴅ Wha? 01:39, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The new signature works. Thanks, Sᴠᴇɴ Mᴀɴɢᴜᴀʀᴅ Wha? 17:40, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome.--♥(Theparties) 23:04, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Imelda (film)

The article Imelda (film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Imelda (film) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 13:31, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for inappropriately marking edits as minor even after a recent block, as you did at Juliette Barnes. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 23:21, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Theparties (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Sorry. It's been a habit so it's quite difficult to undo marking my edits. I check the minor edit to make sure I am logged in (and yeah to avoid conflict). Could you warn me first next time before blocking me? Sorry again. And yeah I agree to stop marking my edits minor. ♥(Theparties) 00:10, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You received plenty of warning above, leading to your previous block on the same issue. I doubt that you mean it this time regarding marking these edits as minor. SQLQuery me! 04:20, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

@Gabriel Yuji (talk), I honestly don't know how to upload an image without any copyright issues. I may be able to fill the rest of the infobox once my block expires. In the meantime, could you find anyone who can do it?--♥(Theparties) 15:14, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can upload it. I found this and this image. Do you have any preference or another image? Gabriel Yuji (talk) 19:12, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The second one. I went to an error page for the first one.--♥(Theparties) 22:13, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Does this link work? Gabriel Yuji (talk) 04:44, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/A New Map of the East India Isles
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:1801 Cary Map of the East Indies and Southeast Asia ( Singapore, Borneo, Sumatra, Java, Philippines) - Geographicus - EastIndies-cary-1801.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 04:31, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Pinctada margaritifera
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Pinctada margaritifera MHNT.CON.2002.893.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:28, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Saddle Ridge Hoard

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Treaty of Waitangi
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Treatyofwaitangi.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:44, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Imelda Marcos

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Imelda Marcos you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jonesey95 -- Jonesey95 (talk) 20:00, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Imelda Marcos

The article Imelda Marcos you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Imelda Marcos for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jonesey95 -- Jonesey95 (talk) 01:41, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

{Unblock|1=(I am putting this unblock on hold as I figure out what to do next.)

Seven months have passed since this block/ban was implemented. The list that justified this "ban" has been deleted because the pro-deletion side commented that it is based on "outdated" information. The user who imposed this block has been inactive for over a month. That user has also created a page about me that may violate Wikipedia's policies about privacy and personal information and that page should be deleted. There have been many times when I have filed appeals to the Ban Appeals Subcommittee but I was always denied and I have grown to be disillusioned by that process. I would like to invoke the "second chance" policy and I would like to cut my ties to my old account and start over fresh and new.}}

This is a checkuser block and requires either the Arbitration Commitee (through the Ban Appeals Sub Committee) or a checkuser to authorise your unblock. Editors and administrators, other than checkusers, are unable to assist you in this request. You may wish to use the WP:UTRS system to more quickly make a checkuser aware of your request, however.
Also, when filing an unblock request, do NOT keep editing it and causing edit conflicts. Nick (talk) 12:53, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, thanks. I am going to try your suggestion. And sorry for creep-editing. I was trying to cram all the info.-♥(Theparties) 12:58, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Since you claim this unblock request is "on hold", I've disabled it. However, were I to respond to it, I'd be sure to point out that the request doesn't address either the reason for your original blocks nor the abuse of multiple accounts, but instead depends on irrelevencies such as that the person who blocked you hasn't been active in the last couple months and created a quite appropriate long term abuse page about you. You'll need to get the arbitration committee to lift this block and give you another chance; I assure you, with your history, an unblock request on this page, especially as poor as this one, will not be fulfilled. --jpgordon::==( o ) 15:00, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2014 Year In Review Awards

The WikiProject Barnstar
For your outstanding contributions for Featured Pictures in 2014 you are hereby award this WikiProject Barnstar. Congratulations! For the Military history Wikiproject Coordinators, TomStar81 (Talk) 08:38, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Filipino communism" listed at Redirects for discussion

Information icon A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Filipino communism. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 11#Filipino communism until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Pandakekok9 (talk) 03:34, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tagalog wikipedia

@Sky Harbor, can you unblock the 23prootie, Shwcz and the Seselas accounts from the Tagalog Wikipedia.
@WayKurat, can you unblock the 23prootie, Seselas, and Shwcz accounts in the Tagalog Wikipedia.
@Jojit fb, can you unblock the 23prootie, Seselas, and Shwcz accounts in the Tagalog Wikipedia.
@Seav, can you unblock the 23prootie, Seselas, and Shwcz accounts in the Tagalog Wikipedia.
@Bluemask, can you unblock the 23prootie, Seselas, and Shwcz accounts in the Tagalog Wikipedia.

Custom signature fix needed

Hi there! You have a custom signature set in your account preferences. Changes to Wikipedia's software have made your current custom signature invalid.

The problem: Your signature contains a syntax error or obsolete HTML tags.

The solutions: You can reset your signature to the default, you can fix your signature, or you can do nothing.

Solution 1: Reset your signature to the default:

  1. Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
  2. Uncheck the box (☑︎→☐) that says "Treat the above as wiki markup."
  3. Remove anything in the Signature: text box.
  4. Click the blue "Save" button at the bottom of the page. (Do not click the red "Restore all default settings" button, which will reset all of your preference settings, not just the signature.)

Solution 2: Fix your custom signature:

  1. Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
  2. Click the Learn more button next to the error to learn how to fix the error.
  3. Update your signature to fix the error.
  4. Click Save to update to your newly fixed signature.

Solution 3: Do nothing:

  1. In accordance with a recent request for comment, all invalid signatures will be changed to the default, which looks like "Example (talk)", one month from now.

If you have followed these instructions and still want help, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Signatures. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:05, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Theparties (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello, I would like to ask administrator to put forward my request to the Administrators' noticeboard for unblock, according to WP:Standard offer. I have been contributing to other Wikimedia projects meanwhile as is recommended for users at unblock requests. I learned my lesson. I know I should not evade a ban. And I promise that I would not do that again. I can pprove this by showing that the last time I have been caught, I actually volunteered to be caught. I did not have to admit to be a sockpuppet of 23prootie. But I admitted it showing my sincerity in turning a new leaf. I know it must be difficult to believe me but by showing that I have not ban evaded in the past few months shows that truly my intention is to follow the rules. I have been editing in the Simple English Wikipedia for the time being. Working on election articles for the Philippines. Please give me another chance. Please truly allow me to become a better editor. I also want to add tat I cannot use my original username 23prootie because I forgot the password and I do not have an email to connect it with. May this username be my reincarnation for a new and better opportunity to prove myself. I request that a WP:Topic Ban on Philippines-related articles be instated for me in exchange of being able to edit again on unrelated articles. ====Theparties → 23prootie==== Status:     In progress

Accept reason:

Accepted, see below for details. Yamla (talk) 10:34, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no technical evidence of recent block evasion. Good! However, the request above contains inappropriate content. This is en.wikipedia.org, you should not be making requests concerning the Tagalog wikipedia and most certainly shouldn't be pinging people about it here. Remove that part of the request and I'll copy the rest to the discussion board for community discussion. --Yamla (talk) 11:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla, Fixed. Theparties (talk) 18:14, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unban request posted at WP:AN#Theparties_unban_request. --Yamla (talk) 22:16, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Low participation in the discussion, but relevant that there were no objections and the block is over a decade old. Per consensus I have closed the AN thread as outlined here with an unblock and a topic ban from Philippines-related articles, broadly construed. The topic ban is appealable to AN after six months. Thanks Yamla for the clerking and the checkuser input. Theparties: welcome back and happy editing. -- Euryalus (talk) 07:37, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nick Begich III (November 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Hey man im josh was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Notability is not based on who you are related to, and this individual, having failed to get elected, does not pass WP:NPOL.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Hey man im josh (talk) 14:40, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:28, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Paraná River

Re the RM at Talk:Paraná River, it's not a good idea to change an RM in the middle of discussion without making any note of your change. I and others have already responded based on the original proposal and they don't make as much sense if people don't realize we responded to something no longer there. If you agree with the suggestion about using the tributary as disambiguator, the best thing to do is just say so as a reply or as a new comment at the RM. Thanks. Station1 (talk) 19:54, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Prosti

A tag has been placed on Prosti requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

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. Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 07:07, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For the renames. Check out the related discussion at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#Suggestion_to_rename_many_criticism/controversies_articles_to_include_both_concepts_in_name Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:35, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Buddy, please.

We're done. Let this be settled without anything else... 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 12:05, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Do you have a good reason to deliberately rename all those colleges' article titles to these short names (which usually only applies if referring to their sports teams)? 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 15:15, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop asking for college and university articles to be moved

Please stop asking for college and university articles to be moved. Very few, if any, of your requests are going to be approved so you're wasting a lot of your own time and also other editors' time. A more productive approach would be to first open a discussion at WT:UNI to see which, if any, of your proposals might succeed and then to make those specific proposals. Thanks. ElKevbo (talk) 15:16, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you are serious about it, please combine all of these requests into one huge RM (or RfC) because it will go against long standing Wikipedia titling convention. No person has the time or effort to go to each individual talk page and support/oppose it. If it's not a serious proposal, please revert. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 17:44, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fully concur with the above analysis. Yes, you are wasting a considerable amount of time for editors who now have to vote down your ill-conceived move proposals, when you could have avoided that by simply thinking it through. It appears that you are acting in good faith, but by proceeding in this ham-fisted manner without talking it through first, you are unnecessarily alienating editors when you could be cultivating them as allies. Next time, think through first what you are trying to accomplish and then float a proposal on the talk page for the relevant policy or guideline or at the village pump.
The larger and very interesting issue highlighted by your proposed moves is that WP:COMMONNAME is fatally ambiguous as to how it should be applied to institutions like universities that have multiple names commonly used in different contexts in formal written English. I think it would be a good idea to have that discussion, but you never actually raised it. Start that discussion and let's talk. --Coolcaesar (talk) 18:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto, ditto, and ditto, and STOP! You made more than 100 of these nominations in an hour. Withdraw them now, before dozens of editors waste their time attending to them. If you don't know how to do that, ask at Wikipedia_talk:Requested_moves. ElKevbo, if I were an admin I'd be closing them all right now under IAR, but since I'm not, I suggest that if they're still open Monday morning, you consider doing that. EEng 21:37, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, a lot of editor time has already been wasted. Many of these requests are not particularly prudent; to give just a few examples:
As such, @Theparties, I strongly recommend that you withdraw all of these move requests yourself. The issue of common names for universities should not have been brought up by filing a massive number of requested move discussions. I'd take the above advice from ElKevbo and other editors and start a discussion about this at WT:UNI or the Village Pump. There may well be legitimate COMMONNAME issues with some of these universities, but like Coolcaesar said, this was a very, very bad way of actually bringing attention to these issues. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"No mas, no mas" A Christmas suggestion from Randy Kryn (talk)

I join in all of the comments made above. In particular, I think if you're serious about all these proposals, the matter needs to be addressed at one centralized location. Otherwise, it runs the risk of arbitrary and capricious inconsistency if people interested in one particular article accept the idea and people interested in other articles do not. That sort of thing then has a tendency to lead to edit wars when someone says, "Oh, well, look, this other article does it the way I want, so that means this one should too." That sort of thing is unhelpful and wastes a lot of people's time. 1995hoo (talk) 16:17, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unhelpful advice actually, as there is no chance such an RM would pass and then Theparties would have wasted their time preparing such a massive RM. Best to drop all of these and move on (and to carefully select RM's, especially around the Christmas and New Year's holiday season). By the way Theparties, a sincere and jolly Merry Christmas! Randy Kryn (talk) 16:57, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also for the murder victims

Editor time is the most valuable resource, and you're not showing much respect for it. It is extremely bad form to fire off tons of RMs that often require research to intelligently vote on without any evidence of having done the research yourself. You've opened tons of deaths-related moves individually. Even if we grant that you are "right", WP:RM is not some debating society with infinite time. You can pace yourself. Please pick some limit on the number of active nominations and withdraw the rest. There is no rush, these articles have been at their current location for some time. IMO these nominations should be procedurally closed, and you can go through them at a reasonable pace over the course of a month rather than all at once.

Please respond if you are willing to accept a voluntary limit on the number of active RMs at once, or I am going to consider bringing this to WP:ANI to have such a limit placed the hard way. SnowFire (talk) 22:36, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am willing to voluntary limit the RMs at once. SnowFire. Theparties (talk) 03:48, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, I think the limit should be zero. There are plenty of ways you might contribute to the project other than RMs and article titles, and since your track record with those is not good, little will be lost if you just stay away from them entirely. EEng 04:01, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Two concerns to share about this set of move requests:
1. Most of the articles I've looked at have been written as biographies of notable people, and not as a description of a notable event. If the right decision is to have the article be about the event rather than the person, moving the article is the easy part. The article needs to be revised to be about the event. Has this editor signed up to do all this work? Where is it tracked so that others can conveniently see progress on this?
2. Many move requests cite only WP:DEATHS as justification for renaming, as though the flow chart provides explicit naming instructions for these articles. I think that's a misinterpretation of that policy. WP:DEATHS provides guidance and consistency for naming articles when the article has already been determined to be about violence. It is not a policy on whether to decide if an article should be about a person, an event, or to create both. For guidance on that issue, you need to look at WP:VICTIM and WP:ONEEVENT. Davidwbaker (talk) 01:30, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As someone active in the relevant project I would also ask that you please do this more slowly! This is too many too fast and these moves are especially complicated. And as the person above mentions, this kind of move requires that the article be completely rewritten. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:55, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting multiple page moves exists

For some of your mass page move requests, such as the college naming is far better suited for WP:RMPM since the discussion between all of the colleges will essentially be the same. In that format you can provide some sample evidence of COMMONNAME, which you didn't even bother to do during your RM noms. TiggerJay (talk) 02:00, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RE: Recently approved unblock request and recent disruptive activities

Pinging @Euryalus who was the unblocking admin. Based on the fervent talk page activity regarding contentious and disruptive RM requests, I wanted to bring this to your attention, since as part of your closing comments you mentioned 'that reblocks are cheap'. I'm not sure it has yet come to that level, but wanted to put it on your radar, given their prior history, this might result in a far speedier than normal reblock versus the typical formal escalations. TiggerJay (talk) 04:32, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reblocked

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of indefinite for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Yamla (talk) 11:42, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]