User talk:SI09

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Welcome!

[edit]
Hello, SI09, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field with your edits. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! XLinkBot (talk) 12:48, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines
The community
Writing articles
Miscellaneous

March 2017

[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Tom Scott (entertainer) has been reverted.
Your edit here to Tom Scott (entertainer) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://twitter.com/tomscott/status/512239401691516928) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 12:48, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello, please do not add external links to the body of articles, per Wikipedia:External links. Citobun (talk) 14:12, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

SI09, you are invited to the Teahouse!

[edit]
Teahouse logo

Hi SI09! 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 experienced editors like Worm That Turned (talk).

Visit the Teahouse
We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:05, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

[edit]
Hi SI09! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 19:28, Sunday, September 10, 2017 (UTC)

Mission 1 Mission 2 Mission 3 Mission 4 Mission 5 Mission 6 Mission 7
Say Hello to the World An Invitation to Earth Small Changes, Big Impact The Neutral Point of View The Veil of Verifiability The Civility Code Looking Good Together

February 2020

[edit]

Hello, it appears that you've participated in the back-and-forth discussion of whether to keep the introductory statement on LGBT culture. If you would like to discuss what you disagree with or want to see there, please give your opinion on the talk page -- specifically at this link. puggo (talk) 02:05, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:53, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lucy Letby opening lines

[edit]

Thank you for reverting the editors who kept trying to change Letby to an “alleged” killer earlier. I’d appreciate any further help with this, not only since there are multiple editors trying to do this today but also as an RFC on the very wording was held and so should not be overridden. 78.25.235.4 (talk) 20:41, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! No worries. I was just doing a bit of RC Patrolling and it didn't seem like a constructive edit. I'm not super familiar with the procedure for it as I haven't actually had to do it before, but if the page has had repeated disruptive edits and will likely continue to in the future then you could consider requesting the article be protected. You can find the protection policy at WP:PP and you can make the actual request for protection at WP:RFP. SI09 (talk) 21:04, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Warning Users

[edit]

Hi there,

Just so you know, it's necessary to warn users about their vandalism edits and such. You can see here for a bunch of templates you can use . Myrealnamm-alt (talk) 15:48, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Myrealnamm-alt:Hi, is that the case for IP users as well? Sorry, I didn't realise. SI09 (talk) 15:55, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's OK, and yes, that's for IP Users as well. For IPs, it's good to add {{sharedipadvice}} to their talk page, right under the message.
However, you can try Twinkle (which is what I use) or Ultraviolet to revert vandalism easier and faster than manually using "undo". They can also give you a selection of which templates to use, which I really find helpful. Myrealnamm-alt (talk) 15:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! SI09 (talk) 16:00, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and, by the way, if you plan to manually revert vandalism using "undo" and manually warning users, you should substitute the Shared IP Advice by using {{subst:sharedipadvice}} instead. I strongly recommend Twinkle or Ultraviolet. Myrealnamm-alt (talk) 16:02, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

[edit]

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) 00:36, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes reviewer granted

[edit]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Katietalk 14:57, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Tula Small

[edit]

Hello SI09. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Tula Small, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Appearing in a broadcast TV series is a cverible assertion of importance. Use WP:AFD. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 15:39, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Whpq, thanks for notifying. Was hoping you could clarify something so I have a better idea of CSD criteria in future. WP:CCSI#ACTOR was the closest applicable thing I could find. That said a claim would be "played a major role in a notable film or TV programme or series". Tula Small only claims to have appeared on a reality show, and this doesn't seem to be a major appearance (especially given lack of coverage, per WP:CCS). I therefore thought this failed part (B) of the two-part test in WP:CCS. Is any size of appearance on any kind of TV series a claim of significance? Thanks! SI09 (talk) 18:06, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What you have pointed to is an essay, and provides good guidance but isn't exhaustive and individual admins may make different decisions. My reasoning is that somebody who had a role in a reality TV series is sufficient for a claim of significance because our media environment has far too much coverage of popular culture including reality TV series. So it is conceivable that there is coverage about this individual. That's not to say I believe the person is notable, but there is sufficient doubt that it should be sent to AFD. -- Whpq (talk) 18:16, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Duly noted. Thanks for explaining! SI09 (talk) 18:20, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:LEADCITE

[edit]

Because the lead usually repeats information that is in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material. There are two full sections about this in the body of the article, with ample citations. It is a gross failure to adequately summarize the article body to omit this content from the lead. 173.79.19.248 (talk) 14:41, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, while I'm here: no it is not possible to violate WP:BLP in a biography of a person who died 12 years ago, but thanks anyway. 173.79.19.248 (talk) 14:43, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've only seen this after my most recent edit, so I've already left an explanation in the edit summary, but I'll mention my key points again here if you wanted to discuss them further. Per MOS:LEADCITE, there is no exception to citation requirements in the LEAD. I agree that leads for most articles won't have citations because the content is referenced later on, but given that in this particular case calling someone's autobiography fabricated is likely to be controversial and challenged, I think the "balance" from MOS:LEADCITE which you have quoted above would be in favour of including citations.

MOS:LEADCITE also says that "The necessity for citations in a lead should be determined on a case-by-case basis by editorial consensus." Given that, in this particular lead, there are already a lot of citations included, editorial consensus for this page seems to be that citations in this lead are warranted.

Additionally, while the rest of the article does mention several instances of fabrications, it also says the core narratives are widely accepted. The lines you added, without further qualification, would imply that the whole autobiography is mostly fabrication. This would not be a holistic summary of what is said later in the article, and would arguably not be NPOV.

Finally, I do take your point on BLP not being applicable here. That's my bad. I didn't clock that the guy was dead already. SI09 (talk) 15:05, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. Personally I do not think it makes a lot of sense to revert an edit on the grounds that someone else might challenge it, but since it seems we are both satisfied with the footnoted version, I am happy with how this ultimately turned out. 173.79.19.248 (talk) 01:28, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback granted

[edit]

Hi SI09. After reviewing your request, I have temporarily enabled rollback on your account until {{{expiry}}}. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, and feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate use of rollback. If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin) and Wikipedia:Rollback. Good luck and thanks! * Pppery * it has begun... 05:02, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery temporarily? until {{{expiry}}}? Heh, seems like you pressed some wrong buttons. — DVRTed (Talk) 05:39, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I meant indefinitely. Forgot that the template did that. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:08, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]