User talk:X1\
User page: This is a Wikipedia user page, not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:X1%5C.
SEMI-RETIRED
It will be awhile before I will have the time to somewhat regularly edit. This user is no longer very active on Wikipedia.
Welcome!
Question for administrator
Do I have a "Kick Me" sign on my back? This[1][2][3][4][5] feels like I am being harassed. X1\ (talk) 01:24, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States electionsGuten Abend, Do you understand that at Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections, per page restrictions outlined in Template:Editnotices/Page/Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections, you are not allowed to reinstate any edits that have been challenged? I have undone this and this revert of yours, which reinstated challenged [6][7] edits without talk page consensus and included violations of biographies of living persons policy either by citing court documents or stating Adam Schiff's unproved allegation in Wikipedia's voice. Also, in this edit you reinstated challenged edits saying "I don't see consensus", when in fact, per page restrictions, you need consensus to reinstate challenged edits (see also WP:ONUS). Politrukki (talk) 20:45, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
Preciousinvestigation Thank you for quality articles such as Timeline of investigations into Trump and Russia (2018), for improving and discussing Sherri W. Goodman, Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections and Greenland ice sheet, for lighting a candle, - you are an awesome Wikipedian! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:29, 29 December 2018 (UTC) A year ago, you were recipient no. 2104 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:30, 29 December 2019 (UTC) 2019Not too late, I hope ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:46, 13 January 2019 (UTC) A barnstar for you!
WaybackThe Wayback machine [8] can be very useful, although it doesnt always work. If you see a dead url just pop it in; if the Wayback machine's bots have crawled it, you will get a list of past "snapshots" of the page. If you have a choice of dates, it's usually best to stay closest/just before the retrieval date of the original Wikipedia citation as page content can get updated or change. Re the Tom Elliot article, Wayback didnt have anything at all for the weekly review city page, so it came up blank, but it was easy enough to find another ref for the information. You can also save urls you want to use as refs there, which is also very handy if you suspect a page might get taken down or changed. There are other archive sites, but Wayback has the reputation for being the most reliable. Curdle (talk) 01:22, 15 May 2019 (UTC) Update- Look at WP:DEADLINK. I've used Archive is before too Curdle (talk) 03:28, 15 May 2019 (UTC) Standard notice refresherThis 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 post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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. 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. June 2019Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. The banner at the top of this talk page is dishonest for an editor who is apparently trying to re-open old disputes. If you have a specific issue, rather than just asking me whether I want to stir up trouble, be specific. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:13, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
DS Alert climate changeThis 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 climate change. 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. 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. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:31, 24 September 2019 (UTC) custom messageHi... if you don't know, that template is strictly FYI. It is part of the procedures for "DS", and is fully explained by clicking on the links in the template itself. I placed the same thing on my own page, and will try to make sure recent Climate crisis editors all have one. No biggie. Just a procedural thing. But be sure to read about DS if you don't already know. Carry on! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:24, 24 September 2019 (UTC)resol Hi X1\, it looks like you're focusing on the positive end of the reliability spectrum this time! Personally, I would do things a little bit differently here compared to the deprecation RfCs.
Now that you're more familiar with starting RfCs, it would be great if you could also consider closing some RfCs once you feel comfortable enough to do so. The requests for closure noticeboard (WP:RFCL or WP:ANRFC) lists all of the elapsed RfCs that are waiting for uninvolved experienced editors to close. The closing instructions (WP:CLOSE) tell you everything you need to get started. There are many RfCs in the backlog, and by closing some of the ones you're not involved in, you help direct the attention of other closers to the RfCs you are involved in (which speeds up their closure). Feel free to ask me if you have any questions about closing discussions. — Newslinger talk 00:10, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
NRA 4RRPlease self revert. You are at 4 reverts in the last 24hr. Springee (talk) 21:31, 25 January 2020 (UTC) "Consolidated" organized crime shortcutUser talk:X1\/Consolidated ... X1\ (talk) 22:31, 21 February 2020 (UTC) To do, for RS tableTo do at Wikipedia:RSN for Wikipedia:RSPSOURCES listings X1\ (talk) 02:59, 23 March 2020 (UTC) Email noticeHello, X1\. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the Activist (talk) 14:13, 13 May 2020 (UTC) Your draft article, Draft:Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections (before July 2016)Hello, X1\. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections". In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! JMHamo (talk) 09:32, 24 June 2020 (UTC) Your draft article, Draft:Relevant individuals and organizations to Russian interference in the 2016 United States electionsHello, X1\. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Relevant individuals and organizations to Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections". In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 03:57, 30 October 2020 (UTC) ArbCom 2020 Elections voter messagePrecious anniversary
If my card 1 or card 2 speaks to you, take it, with best wishes for a new year. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:54, 29 December 2020 (UTC) lifeAT 612 AND THE GOES AS COMM88OB $] 69.253.167.20 (talk) 14:23, 8 January 2022 (UTC) Rationale for including Dark Money (film) in the See alsoHello, is there a reason as to why you included a link to the Dark Money (film) article in the See also section of Chuck Hunter? I don't see how those two are connected, and have removed that. --PerpetuityGrat (talk) 19:01, 14 March 2022 (UTC) |