User talk:Odanr

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Welcome!

[edit]

Hi Odanr! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! --Ipigott (talk) 12:53, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Melissa Choi (October 24)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by GreenRedFlag 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.
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.
GreenRedFlag (talk) 08:50, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red

[edit]

Hi there once again, Odanr, and welcome to Women in Red. It's good to see you intend to help us improve Wikipedia's coverage of women. In conection with the draft you are working on, you might find it useful to look through the tips in our Ten Simple Rules. Please let me know if I can help you further. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 15:51, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red - December 2025

[edit]
Women in Red | November 2025, Vol 11, Issue 12, Nos. 326, 327, 355, 356, 357

Recognized as the most active topic-based WikiProject by human changes.

Online events:

Announcements:

Tip of the Month:

Other ways to participate:

--Rosiestep (talk) 22:19, 28 November 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

November drive bling

[edit]
Guild of Copy Editors Leaderboard Award: Long Articles, 5th Place
This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Odanr for copyediting 2 long articles during the GOCE November 2025 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Miniapolis 21:25, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The (old school) League of Copy Editors Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to Odanr for copy edits totaling over 30,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE November 2025 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Miniapolis 21:25, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guild of Copy Editors – December 2025 Newsletter

[edit]
Guild of Copy Editors December 2025 Newsletter

Hello, and welcome to the December newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since September. If you'd like to be notified of upcoming drives and blitzes, and other GOCE activities, the best method is to add our announcements box to your watchlist.

Election news: The Guild's coordinators play an important role in the WikiProject, making sure nearly everything runs smoothly and on time. Editors experienced in drives or blitzes and in good standing (unblocked and without sanctions) are invited to nominate themselves or another editor (with their permission, of course) to be a Guild coordinator until 23:59 on 15 December (UTC). The voting phase begins at 00:01 on 16 December and runs until 23:59 on 31 December. Questions may be asked of candidates at any stage in the process. Elected coordinators will serve a six-month term from 1 January through 30 June 2026.

September Drive: 43 of the 63 editors who signed up for the September Backlog Elimination Drive edited 693,541 words in 265 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

October Blitz: 14 of the 15 editors who signed up for the October Copy Editing Blitz edited 75,108 words in 31 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

November Drive: 38 of the 65 editors who signed up for the November Backlog Elimination Drive edited 590,816 words in 240 articles. Barnstars awarded are posted here.

December Blitz: The December Blitz will begin at 00:00 on 14 December (UTC) and will end on 20 December at 23:59. Sign up here. Barnstars awarded will be posted here.

Progress report: As of 01:49, 8 December 2025 (UTC), GOCE copy editors have completed 293 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 1,730 articles.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Dhtwiki, GoldRomean, Miniapolis and Mox Eden.

To stop receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:26, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting obvious vandalism verses good-faith

[edit]

Hello there, this message is regarding your recent revert of a temporary account user at Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone. I just want to mention, when an edit to an article is “obvious vandalism,” per se it adds intentional malicious or destructive edits to an article, it is better to use a level 2 “{{subst:uw-vandalism2}}” or level 3 warning “{{subst:uw-vandalism3}}.” These warnings can be used if an edit is obviously bad faith, and using it makes sure that if the editor does not change their ways, they may be blocked from editing sooner—thus resulting in less vandalism and time for them to rethink their actions and decide if they want to be constructive. You can see all the warnings and their levels here. Just a friendly comment so if you choose to acknowledge this you may give out more proper warnings. Best, Thapy-comechatツ 04:45, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For edits that seem to be in good faith, or it is not quite malicious yet still is unconstructive and needs to be reverted, it is better to give the “{{subst:uw-vandalism1}}” warning. Thapy-comechatツ 04:48, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the advice! I'll go ahead and do that :) Odanr (she/it)(talk) 05:09, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I debated putting an explanation...

[edit]

mainly because I thought the edit might explain itself and not come across amateurish. But the reason I did what I did is because there's both repeated information as well as a repeated reference, so I wanted to trim that bit of fat from the article. ~2025-36122-86 (talk) 07:05, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could I ask where else in the article you're seeing that? At least with a quick glance, I'm not seeing it duplicated. Odanr(she/it)(talk) 07:07, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I forgot you don't get a ping since this isn't your talk page and you're a temp account so you don't have a watchlist - @~2025-36122-86 Odanr(she/it)(talk) 07:20, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Hillsy hills

[edit]

Reply, reply mate, you're the one barging in and defending killers, why are you so quiet mate? Awaiting orders? Awaiting orders you are? I'm trying to build an INFORMATIONAL and USEFUL encyclopedia here and you're shutting it all down in the name of loser scum who could only gain fame through murder? really? really that's who they hire? Let me remove the name, small things like this will slowly but surely eradicate the satanic creep, like god approved .. Hillsy hills (talk) 07:31, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you must know, I was creating a new draft article. I understand your concern, and I am myself unhappy with the degree to which we glorify these killers. However, Wikipedia is not censored. (Also see WP:DISC). I'd recommend taking up your concern with AP News, Taiwan News, and France 24, who are the sources for the "Perpetrator" section of the article. Odanr(she/it)(talk) 07:39, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are warned

[edit]

Warning icon Counter-warning, not interested in warring but holding you accountable, no knee-jerk lazy jumpto conclusions and my edits were in line with the text and in line wit wikipedia policy of self descriptive headings. Instead you play knee-jerk god/godess and issued an unwarranted warning to me. Please stop. If you continue this attitude on "now-dying (due to small theopolitically biased small group of editors) wikipedia in the era of AI", you will be held accountable and blocked from editing under the public scrutiny. I am restoring my edits at Human rights in Pakistan. 14:31, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Firstly, that's not how warnings work (there are a limited set of them, which should be substituted from their templates [see WP:User warnings] and used in increasing order rather than starting with the icon for a level-3 warning.) Secondly, simply stating warnings isn't much of a threat without the actual possibility of an admin blocking me, which I don't think is very likely given my behaviour so far. Thirdly, while I am also not interested in edit warring, it seems consensus agrees with me, as I will note that another editor reverted your edits while I was asleep. Lastly, I have to ask, if Wikipedia is "now-dying," why are you so concerned with the particulars of what it says? Odanr(she/it)(talk) 23:52, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]