DarmaniLink

Welcome!

Hi DarmaniLink! I noticed your contributions to Waukesha Christmas parade attack and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 21:03, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

/wave

i have no idea what I'm doing so i'm trying to learn as I go through reading the edit log

probably not the best idea

hopefully i can contribute to the wealth of information here. DarmaniLink (talk) 04:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Comment on User:UnitedStatesofAmericaisgreat

Hey, DarmaniLink! You should add user warning templates on the user's talk page, not their user page. Also, they should be substituted: {{subst:uw-vandalism4im}} instead of {{uw-vandalism4im}}. Make sure to indicate the page vandalized as well: {{subst:uw-vandalism4im|1=[[page name here]]}}. Thanks, Leonidlednev (talk) 16:01, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Got it. DarmaniLink (talk) 16:04, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Also, remember to sign your comments with "~~~~", and use the edit summary. Leonidlednev (talk) 16:23, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Right. I'm still fairly new to this and used to the site doing most of the work for me. Probably wasn't always as convenient as it is now, where it is convenient.

Thanks. DarmaniLink (talk) 16:26, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Signing

Hey DarmaniLink! Thank you for your report at AIV. Make sure you sign your comment with ~~~~. Thanks! Tails Wx 01:43, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Right, I remembered with my mind but not my hands.

Will do when i catch another. DarmaniLink (talk) 01:45, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

No worries. Thanks for your anti-vandalism work. Thanks, Tails Wx 01:46, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Ay m8te! Here's a lovely cup o tea for you!

Just letting you know that you're always welcome to Wikipedia. I understand if you're new here (so am I), so enjoy your day! ☭MasterWolf-Æthelwulf☭ (=^._.^= ∫) 18:42, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

thanks, tea for you too Y DarmaniLink (talk) 19:09, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Your article Saisho Atsushi

Welcome, and thank you for contributing the page Saisho Atsushi to Wikipedia. While you have added the page to the English version of Wikipedia, the article is not in English. We invite you to translate it into English. It has been listed at Pages needing translation into English, but if it is not translated within two weeks, the article will be listed for deletion. Thank you. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 19:15, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

That's what I'm currently doing. There's just a lot to translate and its giving me a headache. :) That's why there's the UC/IU tag DarmaniLink (talk) 19:16, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Saisho Atsushi moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Saisho Atsushi. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has too many problems of language or grammar. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 19:16, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of List of aftershocks of the 2023 Turkey–Syria earthquake for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of aftershocks of the 2023 Turkey–Syria earthquake is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of aftershocks of the 2023 Turkey–Syria earthquake until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Mikenorton (talk) 16:47, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Dianne Feinstein

On 29 September 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Dianne Feinstein, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:30, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Iban people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Betong. 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) 06:03, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

138.219.250.5

Hi DarmaniLink. I saw your edit at User talk:138.219.250.5 encouraging him to log in. He won't be logging in because he is globally banned by the WMF and all his known sockpuppets have been blocked too. If you want to know the sordid details, it's all documented here: Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Belteshazzar. Anyway, he has form for trying to canvas unsuspecting people into helping him. So far nobody has fallen for it but I wanted to let you know that he might try to canvas you, either using that IP or whatever IP he alights on next. If he does then please be aware of who he is and that he is up to no good. Thanks. --DanielRigal (talk) 01:05, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Good to know, thanks. Went with AGF and all and thought it was someone who just needed a little help. Though admittedly, how much they knew about the website did seem off. DarmaniLink (talk) 04:22, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

WP:WAIT Request

Hi DarmaniLink,

I saw your WP:WAIT request for the MeidasTouch Page. There has now been multiple sources stating the need for this change and the article in question has now been inaccurate since July. Can you please help facilitate the updating of the page to reflect the accuracy? .

In the past week there are lots of organizations reporting on MeidasTouch's role as a news organization, yet Wikipedia has been slow to catch up with reality. The page as is, is referring to a political action organization that simply does not exist.

https://themessenger.com/politics/trump-gag-order-blatant-violation-judge-engoron

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-is-about-to-be-ripped-to-shreds-by-new-york-bank-fraud-trial-judge?ref=home?ref=home

https://www.al.com/politics/2023/10/that-viral-video-of-tommy-tuberville-falling-down-stairs-its-not-what-you-think.html

Even the MeidasTouch website about us page linked to on the wikipedia page links to a dead link -- because it links to an organization that no longer exists.

This is the up-to-date accurate page showcasing the up-to-date info: https://www.meidastouch.com/about-us Bam21 (talk) 15:31, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

are there any articles that are about the dissolution of medias touch? The al source implies it no longer exists but since its not really about it per se it's a bit shakey as a source for that purpose DarmaniLink (talk) 15:56, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Comment possibly in the wrong spot?

Hi DarmaniLink (great username!). I noticed this addition to Talk:MeidasTouch: [1]. I'm assuming your comment is in the wrong location, but just wanted to check with you about it. --Pinchme123 (talk) 22:13, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm a bit bad at making my points, but it was in the right place. What I said was kind of hyperbolic, but i was trying to make a point to the IP that he needed to discuss it rather than edit war, and that basically of the consensus was that inclusion made the article worse, then it shouldn't be. Thanks for the concern though. DarmaniLink (talk) 23:48, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Ah, I see, it was from 2 years ago as well, my brain completely misread the date. WP:EUI moment. Oops :X DarmaniLink (talk) 23:49, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

No worries! I was just so confused because of your recent addition to the COI edit request discussion as well. All the best! --Pinchme123 (talk) 00:27, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, genuinely thank you for pointing that out. For whatever reason, it didn't even occur to me. I'll be more prudent to look at dates now and not just assume its something automatic, thanks for pointing out my mistake. Genuinely. DarmaniLink (talk) 00:37, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Kudmi Mahato page picture related problem

Mahato is surname which is used by several caste peoples like Kudmi,Koiri, Dhanuk, kumhar, bedia, tharu, dusadh etc. That picture is not true. Mahato of Bangladedh doesnot mean it is kudmi mahato, I am sure it is different mahato. Someone provide fake pictures of Kudmi Mahato for defame Kudmi Mahato caste. Please kindly remove that image from Kudmi Mahato page. शिवराज महतो (talk) 22:39, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

I dont know anything about this topic, but what about the image is defamatory, and how do you know it isn't representative of them? DarmaniLink (talk) 22:43, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Revision deletion at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention

Hi, DarmaniLink. I've hidden your edit here, including your edit summary. Of course that wasn't for any fault of yours (and I've said so in the log), but purely to hide the nasty "username" you were (very properly) reporting. Bishonen | tålk 12:06, 31 October 2023 (UTC).

No worries in the slightest, if anything, thank you for doing exactly that. DarmaniLink (talk) 12:07, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Rollback

Hi DarmaniLink. After reviewing your request, I have enabled rollback on your account. Please keep the following things in mind while using rollback:

• Being granted rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle. It just adds a [Rollback] button next to a page's latest live revision - that's all. It does not grant you any additional "status" on Wikipedia, nor does it change how Wikipedia policies apply to you.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear and unambiguous cases of vandalism only. Never use rollback to revert good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war, and it should never be used in a content-related dispute to restore the page to your preferred revision. If rollback is abused or used for this purpose or any other inappropriate purpose, the rights will be revoked.
• Use common sense. If you're not sure about something, ask!

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! FASTILY 19:49, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

thanks! DarmaniLink (talk) 22:39, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

User DarmaniLink used the rollback tool to revert to an obvious troll-edit to the page [F4 Phantom|McDonnell_Douglas_F-4_Phantom_II] from my reversion to the most recent good edit. You should probably consider revoking that rollback button at the least. 2601:8C:980:6D20:64DE:89BB:8A14:6C6E (talk) 01:20, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

I was getting used to a new tool, aplogies. The tool reverted the most recent edit when I had the vandalism targeted. Your edit must have loaded right as I was reverting the vandalism edit (it updates in real-time). DarmaniLink (talk) 01:23, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Ah! Fair enough, that makes sense. An understandable mistake, then. 2601:8C:980:6D20:64DE:89BB:8A14:6C6E (talk) 05:50, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

If you're interested, go ahead and make an account :)

The community would love to have you.

Of course, entirely up to you. DarmaniLink (talk) 06:05, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Your revision on Putinism: Current status of Putinism and the victory...

Please help us to revise the important section of the subject article, instead of reverting it.

The Section reverted by you has a pletora of solid references. If you disagree with the neutrality of this Section or the use of certain references, please argue in the talk page of this article.

The removal of well-researched and well-referenced parts of a Wikipedia article constitute vandalism. 2601:646:9A00:6BB0:3DD1:B109:8531:2BC1 (talk) 00:30, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

No, that section is not only horribly written, filled with WP:WTW and it's in blatant violation of NPOV. The onus is on you to justify your edit, other editors have reverted you as well. DarmaniLink (talk) 00:31, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Rothschild family

My bad; I did not notice that the edit I reverted was itself reverting previous edits. I was wary of introducing new emphasis on membership of an ethnoreligious group (along the lines of MoS on biographies § Context) without consensus, but this does appear to be supported by consensus for this article. Again, my apologies, and thanks for letting me know. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 02:47, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

No worries :)

Looking at the edit history, the change was a few weeks old, which I didn't realize either. Sorry if I came off as snippy DarmaniLink (talk) 02:49, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

It's fine! I'm replying on the talk discussion. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 02:50, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted

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

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

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes#Requirements to accept an edit, when to accept an edit
  

Chetsford (talk) 02:44, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! DarmaniLink (talk) 02:50, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

I'd like to help improve Moyai statue

Hi,

Thank you for creating the article Moyai statue: it features a wealth of information about an obscure, but otherwise notable topic.

I would like to help improve the style and prose of the article. However, since I neither have your main source nor know the Japanese language, I'd like to see if you can help me with this. Ideally, I would send you a rewrite I have created, and then you would proofread for factual errors and such.

If you're okay with this, let's move this discussion to the article's talk page. I feel that if we work together, we could potentially create something worthy of a DYK hook or GA nomination. Marisauna (talk) 18:41, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Sounds excellent to me. It was basically just a rough draft where I just translated things more or less word by word out of laziness, meant to be *good enough* for mainspace and designed for someone else to swoop come in and fix it up, so the fact that someone is doing exactly that makes me happy :) DarmaniLink (talk) 22:28, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Civil Service Lifeboats

Thanks for the edit, some OK. Don't get this ??? & n b s p ; Please explain MartinOjsyork (talk) 17:16, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

non breaking space,

basically makes it go from 32ft to 32 ft

formatting thing for units of measurement. Non-breaking space

If the original name is written as "32ft", feel free to revert, I just came across this, not an expert by any means, in fact i know nothing about this :), though it does look like on 45ft Watson-class lifeboat they have it as 45 ft in the lede. DarmaniLink (talk) 17:25, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Ok, Thankyou

Some people like it.

Must be honest, I find it makes editing confused.

And there are plenty of lifeboat pages without.

Might just revert it when I get a moment.

At least you didn't jump in 4 minutes after I posted the new page and change its name!

MartinOjsyork (talk) 18:07, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I was going through recently created pages making general fixes, so, the edit might not have gotten the full attention it deserved.

But, that's why the process is there. Sorry! :) DarmaniLink (talk) 18:10, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

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

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

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

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

TylerBurden (talk) 20:42, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Josh Cahill sock

He also has another sock puppet named "[2]". Sorry that I have to stay anonymous, the person concerned is a bully and loves sending his army to attack people or institutions he does not like. He even sent his army to annoy the US embassy when they rejected his visa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.229.26.175 (talk) 10:48, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

You should email the arbitration committee, along with any additional evidence.

The name sounds bureaucratic, but they're basically the community members (and wiki staff) with the highest level of trust. This seems like it potentially goes a lot deeper. DarmaniLink (talk) 11:45, 28 February 2024 (UTC)y

Not about

I don't know what you are referring to however here is something to understand. People are often busy and you know the sayings "the squeaky wheel gets the grease" as well as "people see what they want to see". That doesn't excuse the behavior going on here. Large amounts of information are being deleted by ElKevbo and Guardian H. Not very many people notice or care. GH wasn't always like this but they have been for more than a year now. Summerdays1 (talk) 12:03, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you didn't participate in your ANI case at all, and your aggression towards other editors continued. It wasn't one off, it was a pattern of behavior. DarmaniLink (talk) 12:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Josh Cahill AfD ECP edit request

Hey, could you please add my replies as proposed in this edit request: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%20talk:Articles%20for%20deletion/Josh%20Cahill&diff=1211318523&oldid=0 ConcurrentState (talk) 23:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

To be honest, I dont know if I'm allowed to, since it seems like ECR is now in place. DarmaniLink (talk) 23:33, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough. I thought you'd be allowed because of what the template says, but perhaps it's best to have that decision be made by someone uninvolved regardless.

Thanks for taking a look anyways. ConcurrentState (talk) 23:43, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Daniel Wiffen

Thank you for your contribution at that Talk page Billsmith60 (talk) 09:32, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Glad to help :) DarmaniLink (talk) 10:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

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

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

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

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

⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 16:04, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: no longer accepting new proposals in phase I

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

• Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
• Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
• Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
• Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
• Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
• Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
• Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
• Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
• Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
• Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
• Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
• Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
• Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
• Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
• Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
• Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
• Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)