User talk:203.145.95.215

October 2025

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Draft:Tropical Storm Matmo (2025), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. MakaylaHippo1998 (talk) 06:21, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Draft:Tropical Storm Matmo (2025), you may be blocked from editing. PEPSI697 (💬) (📝) 06:24, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hi PEPSI697. The materials concerned were copied from the correct draft of the topic but they were not attributed. I have asked in the edit summary the editors to attribute the oldids when they copy or reinstate the removed materials. Thanks. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 06:29, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Matmo draft

Hey, read this carefully. I do not know if you added the "important note" or someone else did it, but I submitted the draft Draft:Tropical Storm Matmo (2025) for AfC, not anybody else. Stop creating the new draft, or else further actions will be made.

The changes will be made a few minutes later. EmperorChesser 07:16, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@EmperorChesser: Please stop. The one you are working on is a fork. Please work under the page which is the oldest and contains much of the edit history (i.e. the one currently named Draft:Matmo). Most of the materials have been merged into this page and you can work further on it. Let's work together to let the draft achieve the article status asap. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 07:21, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, before that, just talk to me a bit first. The draft originally created violated WP:CRYSTAL; it was named Draft:Typhoon Matmo (2025) before renamed to Draft:Tropical Storm Matmo. I received this information in one of User:MAS0802's edits, and if I recall correctly, it was also discussed on their talk page. Moreover, the title Draft:Matmo is too short and missing details.

As said above, I submitted Draft:Tropical Storm Matmo (2025) for AfC; if you're changing the title, at least just omitting the year is not a clear reason. At least that's what I think right now. EmperorChesser 07:27, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As the hyperlinks in the note explain MAS0802 had moved the page all around successively but it has now been settled at Draft:Matmo. It was not me who decided on this title but at least it doesn't get being moved all around in the meantime. Yes Draft:Matmo is too short; and the correct title in a few hours' time should be Typhoon Matmo (2025). Let's wait until then so that the title can ultimately be settled. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 07:33, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Meanwhile I would doubt if Crystal was ever violated, as you have suggested elsewhere too. A draft is a draft and meant to be a draft. As long as the draft isn't moved to the main article namespace under the typhoon title before it actually becomes a typhoon it should be alright. Afterall it takes time to draft anything and the notability of the topic concerned is often anticipated rather than established. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 07:57, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is the answer I got from WP:Y, so you might consider. Wait a minute, your response… it sounds like someone had written this some time ago. Aren't you a sock? Some IP addresses with the same activity yesterday suddenly disappeared today… EmperorChesser 08:27, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guess you are referring to Mike Turnbull's answer. As I said above notability of such a topic is often anticipated rather than established. It's anticipated that its notability would be established by the time it leaves the draft namespace and enter the main article namespace. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 09:04, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PS Your activity seems extremely familiar. I remember one unregistered user saying that their IP address is provided by their ISP and can change anytime[?]. This made me suspicious, and don't let me find out that you are a sock. I have seen enough of these edits that I can boldly write this.EmperorChesser 07:29, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By the way on "threatening South China" it would be much more accurately to say Hong Kong, Macau and western Guangdong. But since Matmo is still in considerable distance from there it may be too early to wrap up on this. The picture is going to be clearer probably in a few hours' time. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 07:46, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I guess, maybe? EmperorChesser 07:47, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Likely. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 09:04, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitrary break

@EmperorChesser: What's the point of creating a third fork seriously? Please hold on. Really. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 09:16, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wdym? It's a typhoon now. EmperorChesser 09:25, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let's move Draft:Matmo to Draft:Typhoon Matmo (2025) as a page move. We can request sysops to do so. The standard procedure on Wikipedia is to keep and maintain edit history in one place as far as possible. 219.79.142.128 (talk) 09:28, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about this… But since I created the draft, the only available option is to merge I think? EmperorChesser 09:29, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eh.. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 09:33, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Right. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 09:33, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry. I looked at the forecast instead of the current analysis. Let's just wait till 09:45 UTC. The JMA will issue its analysis at around that. EmperorChesser 09:28, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What? :-) 203.145.95.215 (talk) 09:33, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@203.145.95.215: Am getting confused. Isn't this the second fork? 219.79.142.128 (talk) 09:30, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned earlier, I created it because I thought the JMA issued its analysis, even though it is just the forecast. If it is not a typhoon then delete the fork. EmperorChesser 09:34, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I mean if the next analysis does not say it is a typhoon. EmperorChesser 09:37, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please hold on a little bit and leave it as a redirect? 203.145.95.215 (talk) 09:45, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yet perhaps please don't feel angry about me if you see content in Draft:Typhoon Matmo (2025) at approximately 12:30-12:40 UTC (or 20:30-20:40 Hong Kong Time). The second-latest analysis from the JMA, issued 03:00 UTC or 11:00 HKT today, still forecast a potential intensification to a typhoon at 12:00 UTC. EmperorChesser 10:22, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep things at one place. Don't create or recreate any fork. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 10:41, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The third one. Draft:Tropical Depression Paolo (2025), Draft:Tropical Storm Matmo (2025), and this one. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 09:45, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, the first one is not a fork. I created it four hours before you guys created Draft:Tropical Storm Matmo and gave me a headache. For proof, I shared it in Talk:2025 Pacific typhoon season. Secondly, yeah Matmo is not a typhoon yet. Carry on doing your business. EmperorChesser 09:47, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's about major contributions not placeholders. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 09:51, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Meanwhile please refrain from changing national varieties of English and date formats established in an article's edit history unless there are strong reasons to do so, i.e. strong ties of the topic to an/some English-speaking country/ies. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 09:59, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you're trying to say. EmperorChesser 10:23, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was you who used the word placeholder in the edit summary. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 10:41, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Show me the diff then, because I don't remember when I did that. EmperorChesser 10:47, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See above. The first case mentioned up there. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 13:30, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-warring warning

Your recent edits at Draft:Matmo violated the three-revert rule. I'm giving you a bit of slack here because, in fairness, all of the reverts of your edits lacked any policy basis, but still, please do not edit-war, or you may be blocked from editing.

Are you also IP 219? If not, I will give them the same warning. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 11:22, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Tamzin. I find it so difficult to explain to people and convince them of the rules regarding date formats and national varieties of English. Could you help explain to them that date formats are not a valid reason to create and maintain forks of a draft? And convince them to work together on one single draft for the same topic? 203.145.95.215 (talk) 13:33, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't want to interfere here, but come on, why did you reply to a 3RR warning with that? There is zero reason to literally start with "Thank you". EmperorChesser 13:53, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

People thank me for warning them pretty often actually. Sometimes even for blocking them. 🤷 Figure it means I'm doing something right. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 13:56, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I guess so; I said that because English spelling varieties and date formats are not related to this at all. The thank was probable though. EmperorChesser 16:08, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They were reverted partly based on a misunderstanding of MOS:DATE. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 16:14, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]