User talk:Texpertt

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Welcome!

[edit]
A plate of chocolate chip cookies.
Welcome!

Hello, Texpertt, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Burrobert (talk) 09:03, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for taking the time to welcome me!! I value that, and be sure I will always do my best for the Wikipedia project!! Texpertt (talk) 06:51, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Lancaster

[edit]

who wrote the status to his Wikipedia? And or did the latest update to it? 174.231.209.53 (talk) 04:46, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Highland Park, Texas

[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Highland Park, Texas, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 09:59, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 2025

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Magnolia677. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Highland Park Independent School District, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 13:43, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on John Dougan (conspiracy theorist)

[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page John Dougan (conspiracy theorist), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 13:23, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed!!!

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. 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 2025 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) 00:50, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page comments a living person

[edit]

Hello again, my friend. Just letting you know to be cautious when adding any derogatory comments about a living person, even on talk pages, per WP:BLP. Consider a quick re-read of the first sentence of that policy page. Cheers, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:42, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this Anna my friend!!Texpertt (talk) 09:33, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

[edit]

You have recently edited a page related to living or recently deceased subjects of biographical content on Wikipedia articles, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Isaidnoway (talk) 08:03, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this!! I have noted everything there!!Texpertt (talk) 08:08, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please also note that some of your edits to Patrick Lancaster have been questionable and disputed, and your BLPVIO on the talk page, as noted above by Anna Frodesiak was unacceptable, so please make sure all your edits, to articles, and talk pages, are compliant with our policy on living persons.— Isaidnoway (talk) 08:26, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Now it really feels that you are WP:WikiBullying me, with you being a senior editor.... You have not provided any examples of anything I have done which has been 'unacceptable', indeed that is the first time I've even heard that word in connection to my Wikipedia edits, you have referred to a friendly exchange between myself and another editor, and are trying to use it for your WP:WikiBullying purposes. Is that acceptable?Texpertt (talk) 08:35, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Anna Frodesiak also said of me "Hi Texpertt. You have a very nice way about you. A lot of editors sort of lock horns and things turn sour, but not with you. And, looking at your article edits, I think you are a good Wikipedian."

So let that be noted, and please stop WP:WikiBullying - I may not be as experienced an editor as you, but I am also here, trying to do my very best to improve Wikipedia, work constructively, and nicely, with other Wikipedians.Texpertt (talk) 08:40, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, my friend. Your best attribute is your congenial and friendly manner. Don't let things turn adversarial. Maybe consider this perceived bullying is actually pushing back a bit on your pushing forward a bit, when it comes to adding content. A good editor told me early on: Articles find their way in the end. Be patient. Take it slow. Best wishes, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:51, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Anna, just such a shame to see a senior editor try to bully me by twisting the words of our lovely interaction and trying to turn them against me!Texpertt (talk) 11:36, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Let me be perfectly clear here, it is not WikiBullying to point out that your edits to the talk page seen here and here are unacceptable. You implied that the subject of the article had down syndrome based on looking at his face and his speech patterns, that is not acceptable. And then you argued on the talk page to keep it in the article. You first added it here, based on a Twitter post, and then you added "multiple claims" as seen here by adding a post from Reddit.
If you don't understand that your comments on the talk page, and the poorly sourced content you added to the article go against one of our core policies, then please take the time re-read WP:BLP. As you can see for yourself, there is an overwhelming unanimous consensus in the RfC to not include it. Furthermore, just because you remained civil during a discussion, does not mean your comments were not a BLPVIO. Thanks.— Isaidnoway (talk) 13:33, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, may I refer you to WP:Call a spade a spade - if Patrick Lancaster looks like he has down syndrome, sounds like he has down syndrome, then what is the problem with saying he has down syndrome? What is the stigma there? Are we into the sphere of ableism? Is ableism a Wikipedia policy?
Secondly, Anna, a very experienced editor, acknowledged that I am a good wikipedia editor, and indeed I certainly do my best. I have not once tried to insert the down syndrome claim since the consensus ruled against it.
Thirdly, your bullying was firstly posting a template which did not imply I had done anything wrong, then when I politely replied, you responded by cherrypicking parts of a friendly dialogue I had with Anna, and trying to twist her words against me. That is manipulative, that is bullying, and that is unacceptable.Texpertt (talk) 14:40, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you continue to imply that the subject of an article has down syndrome based on your personal observations, it may result in a loss of your editing privileges. Additionally, if you continue to cast aspersions by saying that I am bullying you, that too, may result in a loss of your editing privileges. Please let this serve as your final warning.— Isaidnoway (talk) 14:48, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop being so aggressive, there is really no need for it, let's all work together constructively, harmoniously, to make Wikipedia a better place.Texpertt (talk) 14:58, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Texpertt. I'm trying to help you out here. Trust me, please. Really, do not express your personal, negative opinions about Lancaster anywhere at Wikipedia ever again -- not at article talk, not here at your talk. You keep doing it. That is not permitted and could get you blocked. That's really important to understand.

Yes, you are a good wikipedia editor. Yes, some of your edits, like talk page edits expressing your opinions of Lancaster, were not good edits.

Please me mindful that your personal view of Lancaster may be influencing your editing. Be neutral in your point of view when building the article.

If you can link to some edits that indicate you are being bullied, please do so, and I'll give you my honest opinion. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:25, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Anna my friend! Things seemed to have calmed down now, and I prefer to focus on positive themes and positive work here on Wikipedia, really nice of you to offer though! :) Texpertt (talk) 18:38, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Btw I don't have any negative opinions about Patrick Lancaster, I don't associate any negativity with the condition associated with him I mentioned - that's nothing to be ashamed or 'negative' about, not at all.Texpertt (talk) 18:47, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, let's change "negative opinions" to "opinions". So, two important points:
  • Very likely, Lancaster, and most others, do associate negativity with the condition.
  • You have personal opinions of Lancaster and the condition. They should be kept to yourself.
Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:14, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the guidance Anna, you're the best!!! :) Texpertt (talk) 20:30, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]