Willondon

Please put new topic messages at the bottom of the page.
If you've posted here and expect a reply, look for it here.

Not innocent

You keep doxxing - 70.109.151.215 (talk) 20:23, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

That is not considered doxxing. The {{ISP}} template is routinely used when an IP address has been the source of a number of problematic edits. Since IPs are usually shared, these messages are to stay on the IP talk page so that they advise all users of the IP address. The way the Internet works, IP addresses are completely visible here if you don't have an account, and the WHOIS query is a tool available for anybody with Internet access to determine the source. You may want to read the essay at Wikipedia:IP edits are not anonymous. _signed, Willondon (talk) 20:30, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

hey

What have you got against Rick Beatoff? 5.139.25.31 (talk) 17:45, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm gay

I love boys 31.180.141.234 (talk) 18:33, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Your 12/23/23 Deletion- ‘El Rancho High School Page-Sports-Soccer’

"Yes this is long, but I believe if you stick with it will be beneficial." (It wasn't.)

Hello Willondon- (Yes this is long, but I believe if you stick with it will be beneficial. My objective is to fully address your ‘summary’ supporting  the above deletion. I have no interest in engaging in a war of words, so I want to be as complete as may be necessary.) With that said, today I will only address as few as possible of the many valid arguments that can be made opposing your deletion. First, there must be present a good understanding of the vital role of statistics in today’s world and the extent to which they are used. An understanding  that will allow for a simple resolution to this matter here and now. If not, the Wikipedia Dispute Resolutions process and/or Arbitration process may be necessary recourse. Re: Your first deletion on 12/21/23: In retrospect, I admit that content did not belong on Wikipedia. I agree with your objection, although your disrespectful tone was unnecessary. At that time, I was a novice in most things Wikipedia and submitted a biographical narrative that did not belong on Wikipedia. Therefore, I am only addressing  your last deletion herein. I did not respond until now to allow time for my due diligence, ensuring that I fully understood the Wikipedia rules, policies and accepted practices. Today’s submission meets all standards of the Wikipedia community including notability, the emergent nature of Wikipedia, and wherever any sports analytics or encyclopedic professionalism are applied. You stated the following on 12/23/23: “far too much detail and information on one solitary athlete that competed in the 1970s.” 1.“far too much detail and information on one solitary athlete…” is only your opinion. It is not supported by Wikipedia guidelines, the emergent nature of it, nor any other credible source that utilizes statistical data. This is not merely “details and information”, but State and National high school Records, that nearly 50 years later, both are still standing. Although the statistics alone are of most importance, being accomplished by just one person makes them even more noteworthy, certainly not less so. And every day, high school athletes sign professional sports contracts, based in large part by statistics such as these. A good comparison is in a much more recent Wikipedia page that I found by randomly looking at another CA high school. Should you care to do so, you can look at the ‘Concord De La Salle High School’ page. Under ‘baseball’, you will read that one solitary individual has more than 15 statistics, details and information. But most of those are not even records of any sort, just his statistics. There are many others similar to that; possibly demonstrating another aspect of the ‘emergent nature of Wikipedia’. 2.“…that competed in the 1970s...” As I stated, these records- in 2024, nearly 50 years later, remain unbroken in the CIF-SS. One record is still first in the entire  State of California and fifth in the Nation. The other is still third in CA. In another major statistical category, the latter performance is 7.5 times nigher than any other in the National Top-Ten. Very noteworthy indeed. Your statement also infers that inclusion is only for achievements occurring in recent times, which makes it sound ageist. Regardless, I’m sure you can understand the fact that longevity increases the notability of a record, having stood the most critical test of all; the test of time. Should you still have any issues with my new submission, I strongly encourage that you, this time, follow Wikipedia rules, policies, and accepted practices for editing, as well as your own policies and philosophies, such as; “let the readers decide”… and “…stands as desired by the community.” I propose that you leave this submission as is, and in turn, I will willingly comply if any ‘neutral’ party raises a legitimate complaint of the content and also agrees to take it upon themselves to delete all other similar contributions on Wikipedia, such as the one I pointed out above from Concord De La Salle HS. Otherwise, I will continue to oppose any objection of yours as disruptive editing.

Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. Respectfully, TheStatMan10 (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

No clue what you're talking about. Please provide a diff or some other clue as to what you're referring to. _signed, Willondon (talk) 01:17, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Stop abusing the power to edit a page

Please stop editing the Marr College page, you have no right to do so and know nothing about the subject. Please grow up. 195.224.39.123 (talk) 00:15, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

If you aren’t abusing your power, please leave a response on how I can back up the fact I am trying to add 195.224.39.123 (talk) 00:20, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources is the article read to learn all about sourcing things you would like to add. _signed, Willondon (talk) 00:24, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

I see, I’ll redo the section and add citations to news reports 195.224.39.123 (talk) 00:37, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Denisse Oller Wikipedia Page Update

I was requested to update her page by her due to the lack of data of the current page, I am currently waiting for the references so I can update the page with the source data, once I have that I will modify the document using the using the {{edit COI}} template, so you or other can review if the document is fine? Alberto (talk) 20:56, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

With the {{edit COI}} tag, you need to use it on the article's talk page, not the article itself. Yes, that's the way to do it. Note that with sources, you'll need to provide reliable secondary sources. For some statements, the article can't rely on content sourced from her own websites, or from an involved party. _signed, Willondon (talk) 22:44, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

iyftyfttuv

werijretiojwrtnw8trtwyweryewry Bruhuhur239005 (talk) 16:49, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Buffy Sainte-Marie

Hi there. Sorry, that was my error. I was only trying to remove the chief's first name as it already appeared earlier in the paragraph, but I somehow inadvertently removed his surname as well. In my opinion "Chief Lavallee" would be better, but I'm not fussed either way. -- Rrburke (talk) 17:26, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, "Chief Lavallee" would work too, I think. Thanks for the note. _signed, Willondon (talk) 17:36, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Maccan family

I've noticed that everyone is redirecting the Maccan family page, but 'Maccan family' and 'Mac Can' are from the same region, albeit with different histories and some other differences. So why is the page being redirected? Muhammad Musaiyab (talk) 18:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Recently, a number of sock puppets operating across the different language Wikis have been perpetrating a hoax complete with fake sources, both on the article at Mac Cana and the redirect at Maccan family. Probably the best overview of the whole affair is at User talk:IrishKofe. This user was stepping in trouble trying to correct the vandalism, got blocked, then unblocked when administrators confirmed that the other editors were indeed sock puppets with bad intent. Myself, I'm keeping an eye on things, but basically leaving things alone until the smoke clears. Hope that helps. _signed, Willondon (talk) 19:29, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

We understand that concept, but it's advisable to first verify the reference with caution whether it's authentic or not. Muhammad Musaiyab (talk) 20:04, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Article is informational not promotional

Hello user, How it is promotional link? Global Tech Gadgets is official Media partner of Droidcon. You can check it on Official NYC Droidcon site. How a informational article is promotional? The article provides information about event, speakers, venue, timing, ticket pricing information. There are hundreds of press release refrences on Wikipedia, it is promotional? AkiraAnastasia12345 (talk) 20:35, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Answered on your talk page [1]. _signed, Willondon (talk) 20:50, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Hey User, There are multiple dead links on that article, but I can see you are only targeting me. Now I just checked and most of the Reference URLs in that list, they are dead, 404, moved or literally have less than 80 words info related to droidcoin. So please stop abusing contributors. AkiraAnastasia12345 (talk) 21:13, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

https://www.theregister.com/2010/10/22/droidcon/ does this page comes under your RICH Content source??? AkiraAnastasia12345 (talk) 21:15, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

There's no need to post things on your talk page then repeat them here. Let's have the conversation in one place at a time: your talk page. _signed, Willondon (talk) 21:28, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

This is not promotional????? https://www.theregister.com/2010/10/22/droidcon/ AkiraAnastasia12345 (talk) 21:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Do not post on my talk page any more. _signed, Willondon (talk) 21:41, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

== Non Promotional Content, News Related Citations ==
Hey User, As you are pro in Wiki editing, please guide me about what type of content is non Promotional, how News related citations work. AkiraAnastasia12345 (talk) 10:01, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

(back to their page: [2]) *sigh*

Unsourced Changes Help

How do I document a source for a minor change? And for adding factual content to the existing text? Rugby19 (talk) 22:28, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)For adding factual content, see here. For minor changes (I'm assuming you are talking about edits defined as minor by this article), you shouldn't need to cite a source. GrayStorm^{(Talk|Contributions)} 23:12, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

They only allow sources that are affiliate with them, especially leftists funded. They won't allow you any other citations. There are some cases (you can search) where they get paid to allow such citations. ChenChuChang1 (talk) 12:21, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Utter nonsense, new user. I'd ask for the receipts, but I'm pretty sure it'd be the typical crumpled scraps of rain-smeared paper where you can't even tell what Bazooka Joe is saying anymore. _signed, Willondon (talk) 15:12, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

https://nypost.com/2021/07/16/wikipedia-co-founder-says-site-is-now-propaganda-for-left-leaning-establishment/

Wikipedia co-founder says site is now ‘propaganda’ for left-leaning ‘establishment’! You are bigger than cofounder? No, you are just on payroll of George Soros? Possibility is high. So you can't call him utter nonsense. ExtremeTruth498 (talk) 18:56, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

You can still kind of make out the eye-patch and the ball cap, though. _signed, Willondon (talk) 19:16, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Can you lock the page

Can you semi-lock the Scooter braun page - I'm new so I'm trying to figure out how to do it but it looks like a lot of people are trying to vandalize. EAPie47 (talk) 16:55, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

You need an administrator to do that. The article seems OK until today, when two separate editors (IP 103.175.88.120, IP 2406:7400:63:d791:183a:7929:6f50:1c9f) have vandalized between 16:28 and 16:48. If either keep vandalizing there is the usual warn, warn more, report, procedure that can block those IPs. I only ask an admin to lock a page if there is peristent vandalism coming from at least three or four different sources. It's much easier to protect the page than to track down multiple IPs/new accounts for blocking; but administrators weigh that against catching potentially good edits in the block. If it gets worse, and you want to ask for page protection, there's a pretty easy form you can fill out at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection (WP:RPP). Thanks for keeping up the good fight. Cheers. _signed, Willondon (talk) 17:08, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the thorough explanation on the procedure and the link in case it's needed in the future. Are the warnings usually done via the user talk section? You as well, EAPie47 (talk) 17:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

There's a good introduction at WP:WARNVAND. The broad sketch: there is a series of escalating warnings that can be placed on a user/IPs talk page. Once they've been warned enough, you can report them at WP:AIV. Administrators need to be confident that they can justify their actions. You only want to report there if you are confident that any admin coming across the report will agree that (1) the user has been vandalizing, (2) they have been warned sufficiently and (3) the report is not stale, and the vandalism has been happening recently. _signed, Willondon (talk) 17:28, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Hey stop taking my stuff down without any warning

I can pull up some sources if need be. That they were in fact excommunicated and not just "seperated" they're are books published about them. Also my user page was not advertising it was a log of my credentials. Are you biased or something? Priestess Noel Ann (talk) 21:48, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Edit reverts do not require any sort of warning. I can pull up some sources if need be. It need be. You can find guidance at Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Help:Referencing for beginners. Re your user page, I can't see what used to be there, but I placed a {{Db-g11}} or {{Db-u5}} tag (can't remember which) on it yesterday because I thought it was warranted. If I recall correctly, it had detailed information with links to your own personal activities. An administrator came to look at it a little while later and deleted it, presumably because they agreed. Going back earlier, I see that on August 15, 2023, an administrator deleted the page, and within an hour, you recreated it. User pages at Wikipedia are not like social media pages, and Wikipedia is not a web host for personal information. If you keep editing the user page so that it becomes promotional or self-serving, it will probably be deleted again. _signed, Willondon (talk) 22:04, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

understood. The user page issue can be chalked up to not knowing. But my other edits mostly weren't related to my own personal stuff. I am not trying to be disruptive. Priestess Noel Ann (talk) 22:07, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Just to clarify

The deletion and re posting. Was me making a more compliant user page. The references I thought were ok. As they were merely my own credentials. (College certificates, IRS religious organization number, links to my church activity) I understand that even on a user page that is not allowed. But if one had contacted me prior I would've complied. Its a mild nuisance is all as I now have to go back and find my online links separately when they used to be in one place. Sorry. and I guess also thank you? Priestess Noel Ann (talk) 22:25, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Please help me

Note from the Publisher: Please Remove the revision from the "I add Usage In Fiction" and the remove revision of that because the book is out of print and the author wants to be anonymous. Please, for the sake of the author's privacy, remove the revision for his peace of mind. Hoping out that there is no trace of the author's name in this page. As it said in Wikipedia that these kind of informations can be deleted if its reveal personal information of someone. This author is retired and not preferred to get their real name revealed to the public with their old book. Thank you. Wikipedia page: Cryptojacking 120.28.177.22 (talk) 16:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Another editor left you a message on your talk page fifteen minutes ago. It's the correct information (i.e. contact the Oversight Team). Did that advice not prove useful to you for some reason? _signed, Willondon (talk) 16:12, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

This guy doesn't know a thing about Maxillipiidae

YOU StUCK Crustostationologist (talk) 16:19, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

this guy is right Crustostationologist (talk) 16:20, 8 April 2024 (UTC)