User talk:Yae4/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Yae4. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Welcome
Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.
Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...
Finding your way around:
|
Need help?
|
|
How you can help:
|
|
Additional tips...
|
Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!
|
Hello! Yae4,
you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! — Newslinger talk 11:59, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
|
Invitation to the free and open-source software task force
.svg){kind=logo}
|
Hi, Yae4/Archive 1! Thank you for your contributions to articles related to free and open-source software. I'd like to invite you to become a part of the free and open-source software task force, a project aimed at improving the quality of articles about free and open-source software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the free and open-source software task force for more information. Feel free to sign your name under "Participants". Thanks! — Newslinger talk 12:00, 28 August 2019 (UTC) |
Hi Yae4, thanks for contributing the critical reception section to the /e/ (operating system) article. Criticism is welcome in articles when it is reliably sourced, but we can't include self-published sources like InfoSec Handbook and ewwlo.xyz (if they're not being used in a self-descriptive way). If you find any reviews or criticism from reliable sources, please feel free to add them to the article. This can be tough for less popular topics like free and open-source software, but Wikipedia's verifiability policy is in place to help keep articles trustworthy.
Welcome to Wikipedia, and please feel free to ask me if you have any questions about editing! — Newslinger talk 11:59, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- Forum posts are also not acceptable, as they are user-generated content. Please also take some time to review the neutral point of view policy. Selectively quoting a primary source (without reliable secondary sources) to only explain one side of a "controversy" is not neutral. — Newslinger talk 14:37, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- The discussion continues at Talk:/e/ (operating system) § Recent edits by User:Yae4. — Newslinger talk 19:36, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Yae4 (talk) 11:17, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
Liliputing as a Reliable Source (was October 2019)
Hello, I'm Walter Görlitz. I noticed that you recently removed content from Kodi (software) without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. The only actual comment at RSN was that it was "Generally unreliable" and would not count toward GNG, but that falls short of being unreliable. I hope you're not removing it everywhere because of this. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:22, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
- Hello Walter. The change summary was as accurate and to the point as I felt necessary. Previously I did copy paste the notice board link, but it was ugly, and you found that anyway, clearly. Yes, I think you made a mistake, but I'm no wiki lawyer and don't wish to become one. If you'd like to discuss Liliputing source, let's take it to the noticeboard, as was suggested to me:
-- Yae4 (talk) 14:39, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
- BTW, you characterized the actual comments inaccurately. User:JzG also agreed, saying, "That site is basically a collection of advertisements." -- Yae4 (talk) 14:48, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia and copyright
Hello Yae4, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Riseup have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.
- You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
- Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
- Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
- If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
- In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
- Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:34, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 |
AfC notification: Draft:MicroG has a new comment
A barnstar for you!
|
The Linux Barnstar |
| Excellent job on the GrapheneOS article, Yae4! It can be frustrating to find reliable sources for topics on the edge of notability, but you persisted, researched sources from multiple languages, and now have a nicely-sourced article about an interesting operating system. Thanks for contributing this article to Wikipedia! — Newslinger talk 23:33, 15 December 2019 (UTC) |
DYK nomination of Precious Plastic
Hello! Your submission of Precious Plastic at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Morgan695 (talk) 04:00, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
File:NearlyFreeSpeech logo.gif listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:NearlyFreeSpeech logo.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ミラP 15:04, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia and copyright
Hello Yae4, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Judith Curry have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.
- You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
- Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
- Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
- If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
- In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
- Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 14:29, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Precious Plastic
Hello! Your submission of Precious Plastic at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 16:52, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
DYK nomination of NearlyFreeSpeech
Hello! Your submission of NearlyFreeSpeech at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:33, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
If this was the first article that you created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
The page Climate Forecast Applications Network has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seemed to be unambiguous advertising which only promoted a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to have been fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Guy (help!) 22:22, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- Please note that the draft is now at Draft:Climate Forecast Applications Network. I also suggest using the WP:AFC process that would allow experienced reviewers to comment on its progress, etc. Thanks, —PaleoNeonate – 02:30, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Harassment template on JzG's talk page
I'm sure they saw your ANI report notice (which I closed as inappropriate), so why template them with a warning about harassment? When have they harassed you, anyway? Please be brief. Because you attach no diffs to that warning, accusing someone of harassment without evidence can itself constitute an aspersion. El_C 06:10, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
- El C, this is normal paranoia. The idea that I'm somehow stalking this editor is laughable and entirely unsupported by evidence, but when people advocate unorthodox views on Wikipedia and can't accept that they are not going to get their way, they often feel they are being persecuted. Guy (help!) 18:54, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
@El C: Here you say, "which I closed as inappropriate". There you said it was filed in the wrong place: "Pretty much Only the Arbitration Committee can revoke the sysyop flag on the English Wikipedia. Please make a request there, not here."[1]. As I wrote on JzG aka Guy talk page, "harassment was not a perfect fit," but I didn't see another category that fit better. I put the harassment thing because There,Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests strongly suggests having a dialogue, etc., before going There. I believe dialogue is not possible in this case, but am doing my best to assume good faith, follow procedures, etc., although a battleground environment is what I am experiencing.
Did you actually read the diffs provided in the ANI you closed? I gave 2 specific examples at the end, with links to histories and diffs. At Michael Kelly and Civitas, on January 18 I made minor additions (category climate change skeptic and denial). A couple days later on January 21, JzG aka Guy went there and "gutted" sourced material with misleading edit summaries (as stated in the ANI). Those two seem the most obvious. Other interactions are similar histories, but other editors were also involved, so look less obvious, but facts are, from Burt Rutan to Judith Curry, whenever I've been involved in climate change related articles, JzG aka Guy has followed with edits and/or talk. So, yeah, it seems like stalking or harassment.
And I was feeling that before seeing this. There is a long list of ANI's involving JzG aka Guy.[2]. The first few I glanced at look similar, though many are old: Bullying and harassment[3], Personal attack.[4], Gone and "pushed over".[5], User page incident[6], Sanction suggested[7], Misuse of page protection. [8], Using admin tools when involved in dispute,[9] blocked [10], "Vandalized" talk page[11].....
-- Yae4 (talk) 20:53, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
- Making the request (which I read as a request to desysop) in the wrong venue was inappropriate, which is why I immediately closed it. Templating a regular with an harassment warning template is not what I'd consider striking a dialogue. On the contrary, such a warning, with no further details or diffs outside of an auotmated message with prewritten script, totally failed to explain what harassment was even being referred to. Which, in itself, can be seen as a form of harassment. Which is why I also removed it as inappropriate. What you ought to have said was: I felt harassed by you due to action you've taken pertaining to X, Y and Z — not place an automated template with prewritten script and nothing else. Therefore, you have not been acting in a manner which attempted to amicably resolve the dispute, instead you behaved aggressively and inappropriately. Otherwise, I am finding your complaint to be poorly-documented and not that coherent, sorry. If you have grievances, raise them on a user talk page. If you take issue with a deletion, take it to deletion review. But you need to make a genuinely good faith effort at collegial resolution. Finally, when an admin looks into a user whose editing they view as problematic (including in this case climate science Arbitration enforcement), that is not hounding — that is them doing their due diligence. El_C 00:18, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
- Oh, and pretty much any active admin has had a few requests of a negative nature on the admin noticeboards. That doesn't indicate anything about anything. El_C 00:24, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
- @El C: OK. I made procedural mistakes. And I realize admins have a lot of stuff to deal with. So, thanks for your time. A couple more comments. I did take the deletion to DRV. I did attempt to discuss that on JzG aka Guy talk page first: User_talk:JzG#Your_Speedy_deletion_of_Climate_Forecast_Applications_Network. The reply, "please don't write advertorial on Wikipedia" is simply not helpful. At all. PS. I've corrected the links to the Kelly and Civitas histories in the comment above. One last question I still would like answered: Is this, User:JzG/Politics, considered normal and appropriate at Wikipedia? -- Yae4 (talk) 02:00, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
- These are more than just procedural mistakes — they are mistakes that are rooted in an overly-aggressive approach to dispute resolution. As for the /politics bit, I've always considered it fine for one to be upfront about their biases. But I can't really comment beyond that because I haven't read it in full due to its sheer length. But that's my impression, at least. El_C 02:11, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
- @El C: I can't honestly agree with you about who is being too aggressive, but I see your feedback, as focused on one particular interaction, and will take it into account. I've not done more than skim the very lengthy /politics either, but it appears to be "extensive discussion not related...", "extensive personal opinions," and "Extensive writings and material on topics having virtually no chance whatsoever of being directly useful to the project", which would seem to violate WP:UPNOT,WP:UP#GOALS and/or WP:POLEMIC. But what do I know. -- Yae4 (talk) 02:58, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
- I looked at the politics page and admit I didn't fully read it yet as it's indeed lengthy. I however have the impression that it is in relation to Wikipedia editing, at least partly (misinformation on Wikipedia and predatory journals, fake news, fringe views, etc, are hot topics, since they can affect the accuracy of articles). It's possible that it goes beyond, in any case, there's also a Wikipedia process to nominate user pages for discussion. BTW, I'm sorry for the hasty WP:DRAFTIFY move while the article was still at deletion review. My mistake was rightfully reverted by an admin and I voted there instead. —PaleoNeonate – 15:10, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
- @El C: I can't honestly agree with you about who is being too aggressive, but I see your feedback, as focused on one particular interaction, and will take it into account. I've not done more than skim the very lengthy /politics either, but it appears to be "extensive discussion not related...", "extensive personal opinions," and "Extensive writings and material on topics having virtually no chance whatsoever of being directly useful to the project", which would seem to violate WP:UPNOT,WP:UP#GOALS and/or WP:POLEMIC. But what do I know. -- Yae4 (talk) 02:58, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
- These are more than just procedural mistakes — they are mistakes that are rooted in an overly-aggressive approach to dispute resolution. As for the /politics bit, I've always considered it fine for one to be upfront about their biases. But I can't really comment beyond that because I haven't read it in full due to its sheer length. But that's my impression, at least. El_C 02:11, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
- @El C: OK. I made procedural mistakes. And I realize admins have a lot of stuff to deal with. So, thanks for your time. A couple more comments. I did take the deletion to DRV. I did attempt to discuss that on JzG aka Guy talk page first: User_talk:JzG#Your_Speedy_deletion_of_Climate_Forecast_Applications_Network. The reply, "please don't write advertorial on Wikipedia" is simply not helpful. At all. PS. I've corrected the links to the Kelly and Civitas histories in the comment above. One last question I still would like answered: Is this, User:JzG/Politics, considered normal and appropriate at Wikipedia? -- Yae4 (talk) 02:00, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
Repeated copyright violations
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. GermanJoe (talk) 17:51, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Yae4, you have 2 very clear warnings about past copyright violations in your talkpage archive, but continue to copypaste content from external sources into Wikipedia - the lead of Vym (software) is largely copypasted from external websites (and consists of unencyclopedic PR speak by the way). Please stop copypasting content from external websites or other sources. Thank you. GermanJoe (talk) 17:55, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
| | 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 |
Climate change AE
So, about the AE... there's a consensus there for a full topic ban, and even though I'm not 100% on board with it, I'm closing it anyway because it needs to be closed. It's not the end of the world. It is what you make of it. I've seen people come back as better editors after appealing indef topic bans. I do hope to see you appeal it as it's clear you have some knowledge about the subject. Anyway, I have a couple pieces of unsolicited advice for you in navigating the topic ban and bouncing back after:
- First, remove everything related to climate change from your watchlist. You don't want to get tripped up by accidentally reverting something you saw on your watchlist, and continuing to follow the discussions from a distance will make you more likely to mess up and get blocked. And don't continue any conflicts with users you clashed with in the topic area.
- Find something less controversial to edit about for a while. You shouldn't jump sideways into some pseudoscience, alt-med, or politics battleground. Maybe make a goal, getting some obscure article up to WP:GA or something. This will help in your appeal.
- Spend some time reading up on Wikipedia's core policies and mission, and try to make that your primary motivation for editing. It's easy to get caught up in righting great wrongs but the editors who have the biggest impact are the ones who have writing a quality encyclopedia as their primary goal. It's a mindset of "I'm making Wikipedia better by making sure it reflects my (correct) POV" vs. "I'm making Wikipedia better by making sure it reflects the highest quality reliable sources, and maybe sometimes my personal POV may come in handy helping me see in other editors' blind spots and helping me craft phrases in a neutral way."
- Oh, and like I suggested to Hob Galding, remember Graham's Hierarchy and keep all your interactions in the top 2-3 tiers.
Thank you for listening to my Ted Talk. ~Awilley (talk) 22:52, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- And here comes the generic template with instructions for appealing:
Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction
The following sanction now applies to you:
You are topic banned from climate change, broadly construed.
You have been sanctioned for the reasons provided in response to this arbitration enforcement request.
This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.
You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. ~Awilley (talk) 23:20, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Conversations (software) moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Conversations (software), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Aloolkaparatha (talk) 16:08, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Aloolkaparatha:: I am well aware of Wiki's citation guidelines, but I feel your move was improper "proxy deletion." I am not sure what to do about it, but will find something soon. -- Yae4 (talk) 19:23, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Conversations (software) (October 14)
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Conversations (software) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Conversations (software), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
- If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
|
|
Hello, Yae4!
Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Eternal Shadow Talk 21:06, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
|
Your submission at Articles for creation: Conversations (software) has been accepted
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 03:23, 17 October 2021 (UTC)ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
| | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 |
You are invited to join us in our FOSS portal!
|
|
Hi, Yae4/Archive 1! Thank you for your contributions to articles related to free and open-source software. I'd like to invite you to become a part of the free and open-source software task force, a project aimed at improving the quality of articles about free and open-source software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the free and open-source software task force for more information. Feel free to sign your name under "Participants". Thanks! GavriilaDmitriev (talk) 11:00, 24 February 2022 (UTC) |
I found you since you are currently an official participant of WT:FOSS. It is great to see how much you contribute to Wikipedia and especially FOSS topics every day. Keep up the good work! We would love to have you be an active part of WT:FOSS. If you feel more comfortable to edit articles on your own then that is totally fine too. But we wanted to reach out to offer you to work together with other FOSS enthusiasts to work together on articles which need attention. Feel free to join our talk page to see what recently happened (a lot!) GavriilaDmitriev (talk) 11:00, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
AfC notification: Draft:CryptoHarlem has a new comment
Mistaken rollback?
I attempted to fix your rollback to be a partial revert. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 20:33, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
3RR
Your recent editing history at GrapheneOS shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 21:10, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
GrapheneOS website as "user-generated source"
I see you've already self-reverted yourself, however I'll comment on your Special:Diff/1094765286 anyway: I don't see it evident the GrapheneOS website to fit into the definition of a WP:UCG source, only as a WP:PRIMARY source, with the assumption that the website's source markup/code is a Git repository somewhere and that requires editorial review of a repository maintainer to commit changes to (or Git push privileges). The maintenance template in this theoretical scenario would be one of these: {{Primary source inline}}, {{Third-party inline}}, or {{Better source needed}}. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 13:04, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
Attestation
Attestation (disambiguation) → The process of validating the integrity of a computing device such as a server needed for trusted computing
→ those behaviors will be enforced by computer hardware and software
. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 11:16, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
Disengaging with you
After Special:Diff/1095862491, I think I should apologize. I'd like to disengage and focus most of my contributions on other articles from now on. Sorry.
But before I do, I would like to point out some trouble I have with your behavior that has frustrated my efforts to collaborate with you:
- Disputing the reliability of apparently good sources (marginally reliable sources for uncontroversial statements or attributed points of view) at Talk:GrapheneOS, to the extent of disputing the reliability of multiple sources for a specific uncontroversial or attributed POV statement (that may have been originally cited by you); what may be
judging the reliability of sources by how well they support the desired viewpoint
. (A few comments were good, such as comments on Origo and Packt.) - Accusing me of having a preference for sources at RSN (Special:Diff/1095870955), while showing refrainment from critically evaluating the other list items neutrally (imo mostly marginal with one or a few exceptions of generally reliable sources). I was attempting to push the discussion forward with no personal opinion or vote on those sources.
- Adding citations that are inadequate, ambiguous or not sufficiently explicit (examples: Special:Diff/1095828521, Special:Diff/1094307821) – including one WP:UGC source to GitHub (
generally unacceptable
), including an WP:EXCEPTIONAL citation claim about third-parties without multiple reliable sources to verify those claims (doubtful about WP:ABOUTSELF). - This potential prejudice what sections an article can, cannot or should not have: Special:Diff/1095679328. Though, I'll have to assume good faith here since you kept that section.
I have no trouble with Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Resonantia you've opened, I've expected you wanted to do so eventually (it wasn't sooner than the first time you suspected it, but didn't bring it to SPI immediately: Special:Diff/1094493094). I would've liked to be notified with {{Uw-socksuspect}} on my talk page as courtesy, but I was not notified of this.
Perhaps this message may also come as inflammatory. I've not been squeaky clean towards you with my behavior either. When I've been wrong, at least on a few occasions I've tried to correct my contributions/behavior and listened. I hope you'll understand my frustrations and what leads to my disengagement with you. And I hope, if you can at least recognize some of these problems, it will help you build better articles for an encyclopedia. I do understand you're still here to build an encyclopedia in good faith, but as said, my patience to collaborate runs short. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 01:33, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
- You either came to GrapheneOS because Micay was recruiting, with a few meat or sock puppets, or you didn't. Others will judge. See my response there regarding notifications, and wiki-guidance to err on not notifying. All I know for sure is the timing overlaps with the off-wiki github "notability" file creation and editing, and I do not usually believe in random coincidences. Then there is the temporary awakening of dormant accounts, and IMO pro-GrapheneOS biased editing. I'll end with this other admin response to Strcat, another well known Micay alias, who was complaining about CopperheadOS in August 2020, "the entire article is on a subject that barely scratches notability and has become a viper pit."[12] This has been the case at /e/, CopperheadOS, and GrapheneOS. So it goes; or Say Law-Vee for /e/ fans. -- Yae4 (talk) 02:29, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at GrapheneOS. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.
- If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
- If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
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. Thank you.
You seem to be continuing your previously sanctioned behavior (Special:Diff/1096361293) after your 3RR block expired, although several editors disagree with you.
The Wikipedia community does not agree with your interpretation/editorializing of GitHub sources:
- Special:Diff/1094363773
- Special:Diff/1094477304
- Special:Diff/1096319209 (WP:SPA)
- Special:Diff/1096391164 (WP:SPA)
You should refrain from adding statements sourced to GitHub, or interpreting them as "license changes", for now. You can take the steps mentioned above to resolve your disputes or place them into review, before reintroducing the statements. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 15:51, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
- Also anecdotally an IP editor disagrees too (Special:Diff/1096396060), although I'm concerned that editor may have a conflict of interest and should maybe given less weight. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 16:13, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
- I hope I'm not stepping on anyone's shoes here by coming in here (User_talk:Yae4#WP:HOUNDING_by_84.250.14.116) and just saying I am in full agreement with the IP 84.250.14.116 that the heavily WP:UGC Github citations that require a lot of WP:OR to determine what's happening should not be used as citations, and the CalyxOS and Bromite situations are very editorialized and do not come at a WP:NPV and don't really appear to add much relevance to the article other than a negative/impartial tone (WP:IMPARTIAL) to a new reader. I would also appreciate that these interpretations are left out until further discussion instead of leaving them in the article and reverting anyone who removes it (Special:Diff/1096361293). EndariV (talk) 05:14, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
Notice of neutral point of view noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Lamont's citation at MobileSyrup.The discussion is about the topic GrapheneOS. Thank you. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 17:04, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
About disengaging
Per what I said about disengaging, I'm not interested to argue about policy with you. Recently Talk:GrapheneOS has also gone off-topic on several occasions (the latest being the discussion on proprietary firmware), there is nothing more for me to iterate on points but to say I agreed with the other editor who reverted you for the same reasons. Might sound like a vote, but I originally did not want to reply to your original message at all, but I'm glad the other editor said everything I would've said at the time weeks ago. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 18:57, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
NPOV notice
Regarding your complaint Special:Diff/1100007140: Per the notice with red border at the top of NPOVN, I am obligated to notify you. I am also letting you know about this here, because ANEW is not the right place to complain about these things. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 12:18, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Yae4. Thank you.
Sorry, but I must leave the notice for administrative procedure. Ping is not enough. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 21:35, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
August 2022
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to GrapheneOS. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use your sandbox. Thank you.
- Special:Diff/1102122284 by User:Yae4:
Pixel 3 phones
- Special:Diff/1102205328 by 84.250.14.116:
Correct to sources: Pixel 3 → Pixel 3a
- Special:Diff/1102267341 by User:Yae4: Full copyedit,
Pixel 3 phones
- Special:Diff/1102371575 by 84.250.14.116:
"Pixel 3 phones" → "Pixel phones" (because "Pixel 3" is still not mentioned in source)
- Special:Diff/1102545780 by User:Yae4:
Pixel 3 or 4 phones
- Special:Diff/1102573719 by 84.250.14.116:
It still says Pixel 3a, not Pixel 3 in source.
(In error, this did not address to correct 4 → 4a.) - Special:Diff/1102771432 by User:Yae4: Full copyedit again,
Pixel 3 or Pixel 4
.
The Pixel 3 and Pixel 3a are different mobile devices. Likewise, the Pixel 4 and Pixel 4a are different.
The source you've referenced says two things about Pixel devices:
That phone was a Google Pixel 3a, suggesting Anom loaded its software onto multiple iterations of phones over time, and the Anom login screen was not immediately accessible.
Unlocking the Google Pixel 4a with a PIN code reveals some common apps [...]
Your submission at Articles for creation: Mobian (August 17)
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Mobian and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
|
|
Hello, Yae4!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! 331dot (talk) 06:50, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
|
Resurrection Remix OS
the screenshot parameter of the template infobox OS has been cleared, why do you want to keep the caption parameter? also, do you have any evidence that RROS is still active? the development team seems to have now postponed updates indefinitely and not even announced plans for updates.(i am not a native English speaker) ManunChan (talk) 15:18, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- what is your definition of "Active"? according to my search, RROS (OFFICIAL) has not been maintained and updated for over a year. ManunChan (talk) 15:23, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
GrapheneOS - ANOM section reverts
Hello, i have noticed you have reverted edits relating to the ANOM sting operation on the GrapheneOS page.
I have repeatedly reverted your edits because your reasoning is vauge and after checking the GrapheneOS talk page it appears as if your attempting to preserve your own edits while preventing any major changes relating to the ANOM sting operation on the GrapheneOS page.
I ask that you please stop reverting Special:Diff/1120050134, Special:Diff/1120050301 and Special:Diff/1120050486. Continuing in unconstructive edits on GrapheneOS may result in you being reported to Wikipedia Administrators. 2603:7080:A903:F154:495:4A48:C4A:A888 (talk) 17:22, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Notice of AN/I discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Yae4. Thank you. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Regarding insinuations
(Regarding this diff) This is grotesque — I'm not a GrapheneOS "supporter". There were two RfCs (in which Rhododendrites and Kvng, two experienced editors, also supported removing the ANOM section, not for being unsourced, but for being WP:UNDUE and speculative). You can't say "I'm trying hard to assume good faith" and then go on to make a blatant and off-topic personal attack (that I supported removal because it "reflected badly on GrapheneOS"). DFlhb (talk) 09:08, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- I should add that in our previous interactions at GrapheneOS, I thought we saw eye-to-eye, as we were both focused on removing undue or poorly-sourced material. I'm quite surprised by this. DFlhb (talk) 12:11, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks
I got the message on my talk page. You can remove this after you've read it. Ian Kelling (talk) 14:43, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
Please stop undoing everything I edit.
Yae4 will you please stop continually removing anything I add, revise or create to Elive. I stated my reasons for adding the Retrowave release as a historic event (like the other stable releases) as well as mentioning the end of the much cited 'donate to download' strategy.
You made a point of searching critical articles and selectively quoting those, filling almost half the History category with them.
I am almost impressed as it is really hard to find negative reviews of Elive. :)
IMO you are actually vandalizing this article by removing any reference to "free" and most certainly hounding me as a person.
Your disdainful, condescending comments there and elsewhere (like: "constant updates for trivial info", "self-published junk" and "wasting other editors' time over the years." ) don't really help in creating a productive atmosphere or any trust. Triantares (talk) 11:59, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
- I understand you feel a close personal connection with Elive, and that makes it difficult. Regardless, almost everything you said above is false, and nonconstructive. -- Yae4 (talk) 16:56, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Libreleah (talk) 15:46, 15 June 2023 (UTC) — Libreleah (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 11:15, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Libreleah (talk) 07:43, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Libreleah (talk) 16:32, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
July 2023
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 06:05, 5 July 2023 (UTC)Concern regarding Draft:Tommy Bolack
Hello, Yae4. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Tommy Bolack, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:11, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Tommy Bolack
Hello, Yae4. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Tommy Bolack".
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. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. 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! 19:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Hundred Rabbits
Hello, Yae4. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Hundred Rabbits, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:06, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Hundred Rabbits
Hello, Yae4. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Hundred Rabbits".
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. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. 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. Hey man im josh (talk) 21:11, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Well, all the best to you and hopefully you can come back later as a better editor to Wikipedia. 84.250.15.152 (talk) 11:01, 22 January 2024 (UTC)