BrightR

You are encouraged to read these templates before using this talk page. Please use them whenever they're relevant:

WP:OWN I want to revert a change that was made to a Wikipedia article! Is the change leading toward improvement of the article? → yes → Please do not revert it. Even if the change is not perfect, it may still prove beneficial with further edits.  ↓ no  ↓ Can you explain how the change is detrimental to the article according to Wikipedia policies or guidelines? → yes → Edit the article to correct or revert the change. Explain your reasons in the edit summary and, if your edit is disputed, elaborate in the talk page.  ↓ no  ↓ You might be engaging in ownership behavior and reverting the change based on personal reasons rather than reasons pertinent to Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Please do not revert the edit and instead, try to parse your reasons through the relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines before editing further. {{User:BrightR/Flowchart/WP:OWN}} WP:DE I want to include material in a Wikipedia article! Does this material verifiably come from a reliable source? → no → It cannot be included in an article.  ↓ yes  ↓ Does the material, as added, follow all other relevant Wikipedia content policies? For example:  • Is it in proper context?  • Is it given due weight?  • Is it free of legal issues? → no → It may be included in an article, but it needs to be put in context, placed in a different section or article, cleared of legal issues, and edited to follow any other relevant policies and guidelines.  ↓ yes  ↓ Is it free of disputes that are made in good faith? → no → The disputes must be resolved before the material is included.  ↓ yes  ↓ Congratulations! Barring any other issues, this material may be included in an article. {{User:BrightR/Flowchart/WP:EDITING}} I want to cite Wikipedia:Ignore all rules as a justification for my actions! Were you being disruptive? → yes → Do not cite WP:IAR.  ↓ no  ↓ Were you being uncivil? → yes → Do not cite WP:IAR.  ↓ no  ↓ Were you addressing an exceptional situation that isn't properly addressed by Wikipedia policies and guidelines? → yes → You should cite WP:IAR and explain which circumstances make the existing Wikipedia policies and guidelines unfit for this particular case.  ↓ no  ↓ Do not cite WP:IAR. If you find yourself habitually citing "ignore all rules" and claiming Wikipedia policies and guidelines do not apply, perhaps it is because you have an entrenched sense of entitlement. Such feelings of entitlement impede the ability to work collaboratively. {{User:BrightR/Flowchart/WP:IAR}} WP:V {{User:BrightR/WP:V}} All material in Wikipedia articles must be verifiable. Any material whose verifiability has been challenged must include an inline citation that directly supports the material. Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed. Wikipedia · Verifiability policy WP:CONSENSUS {{User:BrightR/WP:LOCALCONSENSUS}} Local consensus Where there is a global consensus to edit in a certain way, it should be respected and cannot be overruled by a local consensus. However, on subjects where there is no global consensus, a local consensus should be taken into account. Wikipedia Arbitration Committee · Levels of consensus Local consensus Consensus among a limited group of editors, at one place and time, cannot override community consensus on a wider scale. For instance, unless they can convince the broader community that such action is right, participants in a wikiproject cannot decide that some generally accepted policy or guideline does not apply to articles within its scope. Wikipedia · Consensus § Levels of consensus MOS:PLOT {{User:BrightR/WP:PRIMARYPLOT}} {{User:BrightR/MOS:PLOT}}

Please comment on Talk:Danica Roem

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Danica Roem. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, BrightR. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Raj Senani

You are right. I moved this obvious autobiography to user:Drsenani. Guy (Help!) 12:16, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

They've managed to pollute Wikipedia with their self-published research on many Wikipedia articles, for example the further reading section in Nullor, nullator, norator, and other less conspicuous edits. Bright☀ 04:38, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Warning and advice

Stop picking fights with Beyond My Ken. Given your recent drama with him at ANI, this edit war you started certainly looks like a personal vendetta. If you continue to target BMK, administrators will have no choice but to block you from editing and/or ban you from interacting with him. Consider this a final warning to stop harassing BMK. Wikipedia is much more enjoyable when we respect other editors, seek consensus, and edit in harmony. If the only way to achieve this is for you to completely avoid interacting with him, so be it. My advice to you is avoid interacting with BMK and focus on enjoying editing. Let us put this behind us! Thank you, Malinaccier (talk) 18:17, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

I am not targeting BMK. It happens that he is disruptive on many articles. I am not targeting him for WP:OWN any more than I am "targeting" Drsenani for WP:COI. When I come across the problems they create, I fix them.

While I am not actively seeking him, it is trivial to come across an article he edits, and frequently such articles have WP:OWN issues, where BMK reverts any edit to his article. Resigning to shaking my head at his entitlement and moving on may be more enjoyable now, but it is detrimental to Wikipedia in the long run, and perpetuates his disruptive behavior. Bright☀ 03:34, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Be bold

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Be bold. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kiznaiver

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kiznaiver. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

February 2018

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. If you need guidance on how to create appropriate pages, try using the Article Wizard. Please refrain from creating large amounts of "List of X characters" pages without any secondary sources. Per WP:PRIMARY, "do not base an entire article on primary sources". These belong in a fan wiki and not Wikipedia. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 15:43, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

@Zxcvbnm: This is regarding what? I haven't edited anything today. And I haven't created any articles without sources. Bright☀ 18:47, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

@Zxcvbnm: it appears you have posted a stale warning with a false claim of creating pages with no secondary sources. Bright☀ 18:52, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:COI

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:COI. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Star Wars Clone Wars characters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Clone Wars (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Legobot (talk) 04:28, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

12 Monkeys - Please hold off on reinserting your material

I understand even if I don't agree with your perspective, but looking at the edit history for the article right now I feel you're edit-warring. Please don't reinsert your edits without a clear consensus in favor of doing so (your RfC is a good step along that path, though I feel you may have jumped the gun). If you continue to reinsert your edits without a clear consensus I may feel I have no choice but to escalate the matter. I'm not trying to threaten or intimidate you...you've been here ten years, so I assume you have an understanding of the edit-warring policies and 3RR. Thank you for your understanding! DonIago (talk) 15:30, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

The problem is that "clear consensus" doesn't mean local consensus. When an editor makes an edit against policy, it can be reverted because the policy represents consensus. When an editor makes an edit that is backed by policies and guidelines, it can't be reverted on the grounds of "not needed" or "no consensus". The guidelines represent consensus. If you disagree with them, you need to get consensus.

Like The Old Jacobite said, my edit is supported by guidelines, but he feels it's unnecessary. Oops. Consensus by mob. Bright☀ 18:30, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Either way, if this were to go before WP:3RN, I doubt the feeling would be that you had sufficient justification for your repeated reversions, as you're not reverting clear vandalism and there's clearly an ongoing debate, that you're aware of, as to whether the material you wish to include is appropriate. Therefore, best to wait until such a consensus emerges, I think. Certainly for edits like this, there is no deadline, given that we're talking about a film that came out well over a decade ago. DonIago (talk) 05:40, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes I am aware of the trigger-happy admins on WP:3RN that would block someone for improving an article according to Wikipedia policies and guidelines rather than deal with a well-known editor who WP:OWNs an article. I am attempting to change that. Bright☀ 13:38, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

It seems a little self-righteous to claim that you're improving the article when other editors have expressed a belief that you're not improving the article, and I hope it's understandable why "I'm improving the article" isn't a valid justification for edit-warring, but as you seem to take my point, I think I'm done commenting further on the matter. DonIago (talk) 05:24, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

The guidelines and policies specifically call it an improvement. It helps the reader see that the plot summary is faithful to the primary source. The other editors WP:JUSTDON'TLIKEIT and can't articulate why, except Masem who's been trying, each time from a different angle, but he's grasping at straws. The policy and guideline are explicit and straightforward. This is an example of mob rule, where, despite existing policies and guidelines, editors who WP:OWN the article do not "approve" of changes and give flimsy excuses. Bright☀ 06:21, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Done here. If you're so convinced your edits are correct, re-insert them without a clear consensus you can point to and we'll take it to WP:3RN and let them decide whether you were edit-warring or not. Otherwise, it seems you do care about getting a consensus before reinserting your edits, in which case I don't know why you're arguing with me here. DonIago (talk) 04:32, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Because you say wrong things, like without a clear consensus despite a policy and guideline that encourage this edit; other editors have expressed a belief that you're not improving the article which is a belief that wasn't articulated except by "not needed" which is against Wikipedia policy; consensus you can point to I can point to the policy and guideline, but sadly as stated above, WP:3RN would be more than happy to block me for standing up to WP:OWNers who WP:JUSTDON'TLIKEIT and don't have a policy or guideline to stand on. That's not consensus, that's mob rule. Bright☀ 16:04, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Android software development, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Standalone software (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:30, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:David Ogden Stiers

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:David Ogden Stiers. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 04:15, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello BrightR. It looks like you are risking a block due to edit warring at 12 Monkeys per this comment by administrator User:MSGJ. There may still be time for you to respond and promise to stop the war. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 21:33, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes I am waiting for a response from you on that page. Thank you — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:36, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Android software development, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Standalone software (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed article creation trial/Request for comment on permanent implementation

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed article creation trial/Request for comment on permanent implementation. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Wikidata/2018 Infobox RfC

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Wikidata/2018 Infobox RfC. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

ANI notification

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:04, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Topic ban

Per [1], you are topic banned from discussion of sourcing of plot sections for one year. By implication, BrightR is also restricted from disputes over plot sections that centre on sourcing. No breaching experiments, no pushing the boundaries. I think that is the lightest touch we can go with here - you're not prevented form editing int he topic area or even from adding or editing plot summaries, only from argufying over sourcing. Guy (Help!) 08:23, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing. Legobot (talk) 04:34, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

File:My Little Pony Friendship is Magic logo.svg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:My Little Pony Friendship is Magic logo.svg, 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. Shwangtianyuan Merry Christmas and Happy New Year 05:15, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Wikipe-tan

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Wikipe-tan. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:IP block exemption

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:IP block exemption. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Enforceability of logged voluntary editing restrictions

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Enforceability of logged voluntary editing restrictions. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

I believe that...

...you have been warned by administrators in the past about following me around and attempting to provoke disputes with me. You seem to have done the same thing on Exhibitionism. If you continue to do this, I will be forced to bring your continuing WP:Harrassment behavior to the attention of administrators. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:19, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Please follow MOS:IM and stop reverting with WP:OWNBEHAVIOR reasons. If you think this dispute is unfair and targeting you personally, please feel free to read MOS:IM again and see if it mentions you at all. Bright☀ 07:23, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Beyond My Ken, I was wondering why you feel I'm chasing you around, so I looked into your recent contributions. It appears your bad edits and ownership behavior are on a large number of articles so it's easy to bump into them. You're currently forcing your preferred layout (images over headers, custom image sizes, custom tag placement; all against consensus) on:

• striptease
• lapdance
• ogopogo

...and you're engaging in ownership "status quo" undos in countless others. People have been telling you to cut it out for ten years and you've been on AN/I about it at least three times, I think it's time for you to listen. Maybe you wouldn't feel so hounded if you just stopped undoing articles to "status quo" (which is always your preferred version) instead of using consensus. Bright☀ 08:43, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Sofia Airport

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sofia Airport. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (organizations and companies)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (organizations and companies). Legobot (talk) 04:33, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Retrocausality

Hi there, from your friendly kook. You might like to revert this edit of mine, in which I deleted some kooky stuff, oh dear. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 22:00, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Steelpillow for the record I don't call you a kook, I said you side with the kooks, meaning the parapsychologists who offered up the unreliable, isolated study. Bright☀ 13:15, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Whatever you meant, making personal remarks in an edit comment is a dangerous thing to do, you should keep them for the talk pages or to yourself. There is a policy or guideline about that somewhere, but I am guessing this is not the first time you will have been reminded of it. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 15:49, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

It's not a dangerous thing to do because it wasn't a personal remark. You called the skepticism of parapsychology "negative" so it's reasonable to assume you think of parapsychology is positive, or that you side with them. They are demonstrably kooks. Bright☀ 22:18, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Your assumption is unreasonable. I used the term "negative" in the sense of "adverse" - in denial that the subject of the article is a real phenomenon. Please do not load your own values onto other people's remarks, but assume good faith and take time to think through what a rational and balanced editor might be trying to say. But that is by the bye. Nobody reading your post-rationalisation here will see it as anything other than wriggling and logic-chopping. For your own sake, please do not put kneejerk personal criticisms into edit comments, it really will get you into trouble one day. You may take my remarks as you find them, they are intended to inform not to attack. I will not be watching for a reply. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 09:09, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

That still reasonably gives the impression you side with them, no value-loading necessary. Bright☀ 12:47, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, BrightR. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

User:Kvng/RTH

With regards to [2]. Please have a look at User:Kvng/RTH. These are not signatures; they are review bookmarks. They are HTMl comments so are not visible to readers. ~Kvng (talk) 14:47, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Whatever it is, it doesn't remove the requirement for a citation. Bright☀ 03:10, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Ren & Stimpy Show, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jim Smith (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

re {{Better source}}

How come, in this case? Herostratus (talk) 10:14, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

First, see actual usage of the template where it is used inline with the text, not at the footnotes section. Second, because "it interrupts the flow of the article" is not a valid reason to hide that the content is being disputed. It is much more important for the reader to know that the reference is bad/faulty/inaccurate/insufficient/disputed than for the reader to have their flow uninterrupted by such matters. Bright☀ 10:22, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

OK. I hear you. Herostratus (talk) 19:58, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

You've been unsubscribed from the Feedback Request Service

Hi BrightR! You're receiving this notification because you were previously subscribed to the Feedback Request Service, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over three years.

In order to declutter the Feedback Request Service list, and to produce a greater chance of active users being randomly selected to receive invitations to contribute, you've been unsubscribed, along with all other users who have made no edits in three years or more.

You do not need to do anything about this - if you are happy to not receive Feedback Request Service messages, thank you very much for your contributions in the past, and this will be the last you hear from the service. If, however, you would like to resubscribe yourself, you can follow the below instructions to do so:

1. Go to the Feedback Request Service page.
2. Decide which categories are of interest to you, under the RfC and/or GA headings.
3. Paste {{Frs user|{{subst:currentuser}}|limit}} underneath the relevant heading(s), where limit is the maximum number of requests you wish to receive for that category per month.
4. Publish the page.

If you've just come back after a wikibreak and are seeing this message, welcome back! You can follow the above instructions to re-activate your subscription. Likewise, if this is an alternate account, please consider subscribing your main account in much the same way.

Note that if you had a rename and left your old name on the FRS page, you may be receiving this message. If so, make sure your new account name is on the FRS list instead.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask on the Feedback Request Service talk page, or on the Feedback Request Service bot's operator's talk page. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:26, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Samus Aran

Samus Aran has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Damien Linnane (talk) 13:11, 26 May 2023 (UTC)