User talk:The Banner/Archive08

WP:MEDRS

Medical content generally needs to be based on references that satisfy WP:MEDRS. You restored a bunch of content based on 1) very old refs, 2) primary sources, 3) sources were the person adding them have a COI

Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:26, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I know that you want to protect your own world of thinking. The Banner talk 15:11, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Sourcing

Please stop adding unsourced or invalidly sourced content, as you did to Periodontitis. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Jytdog (talk) 17:13, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Edit war warning, plus ??

The content you are restoring is being added by an editor who is now blocked who has been edit warring self-cited, inappropriately sourced content into WP to support his notions about dental health, contravening WP:MEDCOI and many other policies and guidelines.

If you want to help, please find MEDRS refs to support whatever ideas are supportable.

In the meantime, all you are doing is unconstructive edit warring on behalf of someone who is NOTHERE.

Your recent editing history at Periodontitis shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jytdog (talk) 17:15, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

You are absolutely hilarious, Jytdog. I hope you have noticed that you have been engaged in an editwar? And the accusation that I am editwarring is a complete fabrication and faslification! The Banner talk 18:08, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

You were edit warring. Please read or re-read WP:EW if you think you weren't. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:22, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

I have just two edits in two days. In contrast, Jytdog had removed the info five times in a few days. The Banner talk 18:39, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, he is edit warring too. But my point is that your claim you were not edit warring is incorrect. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:53, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

References

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Remember that when adding content about health, please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations (There are several kinds of sources that discuss health: here is how the community classifies them and uses them). WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a built-in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Jytdog (talk) 17:16, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

And this is the typical kind of bullying that everyone get who dares to disagree with MEDRS. A complete stranglehold to protect their own believes. The Banner talk 19:29, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Matter of Opinion

I see you disagree with my word choice of Scott Roeder as an advocate, and I certainly disagree with your wording of him as an extremist. In order to ensure that neutrality is maintained on Wikipedia, perhaps we should not use either one of those words, and simply refer to him by his name, Scott Roeder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thegoodmanisamazing (talk • contribs) 16:48, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

This encyclopedia is based on sources, not on opinions. As the sources call Roeder an extremist, we should do that too. Nothing opinionated in following the sources, but whitewashing against the sources is stating an opinion. The Banner talk 17:01, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Why not? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:19, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Question

There are lies printed about Wikipedia authors on Talk:Northwell Health. Are these considered personal attacks? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:6A5B:B000:918C:ABAC:C10C:638F (talk) 01:14, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

The Conflict of Interest-tag? I do not think it is a personal attack. It is a statement of concern.

By far the best thing you can do is reading Reliable Sources and then replace all related external links to sources that are independent (not in anyway related to the subject), reliable (no blogs or social media like YouTube) and prior published. It is more than likely that newspapers reported about the group and new hospitals joining it.

Do not start fighting it head on. The guy posting it is a member of a team, and the only effect will be that you will get hammered and frustrated. Improve the article with sources and make the article neutral in style and tone. That is the best advice I can give you now. The Banner talk 03:48, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

regarding my edit on "Norse-Gaels"

I'm fairly new to this, policy-wise, so I'm afraid I didn't understand what you meant by "Linking to a page called "subject (disambiguation)" is an trick to allow a link to a disambiguation page without showing up in all kinds of maintenances pages." The Verified Cactus 100% 19:39, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

It means: you can leave it as it is.

Both Óttar and Ottar (disambiguation) are links to disambiguation pages. But in this case, the link to Ottar is on purpose. However, the first link will be seen as unintended link to a disambiguation page and picked up by bot creating maintenance pages with list of link to disambiguation pages that have to be fixed.

The link to "Ottar (disambiguation)" will also be seen by the bots but is programmed to ignore it as an intended link to a disambiguation pages.

There is no visual difference on the article page (the piping makes the difference invisible) with either link. But there is a difference how the link will be treated in the background.

I hope this shines a light on your question! There is a whole world of maintenance behind the curtains of Wikipedia The Banner talk 20:12, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Thanks! The Verified Cactus 100% 21:12, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2018

• News and notes: Communication is key

• In the media: The Paris Review, British Crown and British Media

• Featured content: History, gaming and multifarious topics

• Interview: Interview with Ser Amantio di Nicolao, the top contributor to English Wikipedia by edit count

• Technology report: Dedicated Wikidata database servers

• Humour: Why don't we have an article about _________?

• Arbitration report: Mister Wiki is first arbitration committee decision of 2018

• Traffic report: The best and worst of 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:27, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

AN/I

Hello TB. I want to let you know that a thread about you has been opened here Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#The Banner and editing warring. MarnetteD|Talk 22:46, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Citing sources

Now that I've had the bad luck of coming across you again, I see that on the German-Soviet Border agreement page, which you seem to be new to, you undid two of my edits and then left a cryptic message on my talk page asking me to familiarize myself with Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. Please elaborate on what policy or guideline states that requiring information to be cited with reliable sources is against any of Wikipedia's policies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thegoodmanisamazing (talk • contribs) 22:31, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

You better watch your steps now, after that false allegation. You managed to draw a lot of attention towards yourself! The Banner talk 01:27, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Freedom of speech is what separates us Americans from you Krauts, isn't it? Thegoodmanisamazing (talk) 04:46, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Now you have to learn the value of your big words. The Banner talk 04:04, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Thegoodmanisamazing, you cannot even get your ethnic slurs straight. Please be aware that competence is required to edit Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:30, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Pictures

Bro, how to add images on Wikipedia page? Cuty Pie Sweetu (talk) 03:49, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

My advice is that you first properly declare your Conflict of Interest. The way you are editing gives me the nasty idea that you are editing for Zee Enterprises in a paid capacity. Please read WP:PAID. The Banner talk 10:09, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Regarding my edits on the FTP articles

Hi, you recently cancelled my changes for the following pages:

* List of FTP server software
* Comparison of FTP client software
* Comparison of SSH servers

I'd like to apologise for changing the first page without paying attention to the red links, but the other two pages do not enforce the same rules and do already contain red links. Could you please revert back the two changes or provide an explanation, it's very confusing right now. We are still working on the approval of Draft:Pro:Atria in the meantime. Thanks in advance.

Stas` (talk) 20:02, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

"We"??

Do you have an interest in Pro Atria? The Banner talk 22:33, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

I wrote the draft and gathered the feedback from both users who reviewed the article. They asked to obtain more references since the governmental websites are not enough. Stas` (talk) 17:47, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Appologies for raising this question again, but could you please take some time and explain the reason why you are reverting changes to the article edits from the above. Otherwise I will have to request the deletion of all these articles under the argument of Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory and I will have to request your activity to be reviewed. Stas` (talk) 12:44, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

SPAM. The Banner talk 12:58, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Could you elaborate why the edits are SPAM and the rest of the page is not spam? Stas` (talk) 15:41, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

The difference is that all other programs have their own article, in according to the relevant guidelines. Your program does not have its own article and you are trying to circumvente that nasty detail by using a refused draft. Write a proper, neutral, adequately sourced article first, then try to add it to the list again. The Banner talk 15:59, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

The sheer fact that you start threatening me is in my opinion a reason to by highly suspicious about your motives. The Banner talk 16:03, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

You still didn't answer my question: why are you refusing contributions to the pages that already do not follow these rules? And I'm not threatning you, I'm trying to fight this lack of communication by listing my options. The articles above already go against the Wikipedia policy. Just try to be consistent if you're objective.Stas` (talk) 22:08, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

The answer is there, loud and clear. But that seems to be problematic, so: Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists. The Banner talk 22:14, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Based on the information from that page and the WP:CSC, the last edits to the last two articles were reverted without clear explanations. The lists fall under the Short, complete lists of every item that is verifiably a member of the group criteria. The reason I'm pushing this discussion is to provide a more consistent list/article on the topic of the file transfer related software. I don't ask for special treatment, I just want to understand the whole process and I expect consistency. I don't know how else can I improve an article. Thanks for all your time so far! Stas` (talk) 14:35, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Instead of banging around, you could have tried to write the article. But you are more interested in rights and consistency than in an article that clearly proves the notability of the subject. To my opinion, you are acting like a marketeer. The Banner talk 14:41, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 26

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 26, December – January 2018

• #1Lib1Ref
• User Group update
• Global branches update
• Spotlight: What can we glean from OCLC’s experience with library staff learning Wikipedia?
• Bytes in brief

Arabic and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:36, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

FFA SPI

G'day from Oz; while I fully support your efforts with respect to FFA P-16, the recent SPI was ill-conceived. The edit by Molly Park showed clearly that it wasn't FFA, as he has never once formatted an inline citation correctly (and probably doesn't know how), whereas Molly Park did. Margaritaloulou showed a different sort of ineptitude to FFA's, while Ekcelsior's work consisted of fixing the sort of mistakes that FFA used to make and never realized that he'd made them. I very much doubt that FFA would edit an article to state that a Swiss town was in Sweden, as DustinMachat did. It seems that you have assumed that these people are socks because of the articles they edited, rather than the qualities of the edits themselves. I would not like for people to start thinking ill of you for opening unnecessary sockpuppet investigations. Cheers and regards YSSYguy (talk) 02:03, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I was indeed severely wrong with that SPI and I apologize for that. The Banner talk 09:41, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

What about Special:Contributions/178.197.231.203? Seems to be the same sort of persistent editing that FFA did. Any thoughts? - BilCat (talk) 14:57, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Seeing the poor English here, that IP is certainly suspect. IPs from that range have been blocked before as suspected socks. See also nl:Overleg gebruiker:FFA P-16/blockmsg The Banner talk 15:05, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Reported at WP:AIV. The Banner talk 15:12, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Notre Dame Cristo Rey High School

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Notre Dame Cristo Rey High School. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 5 February 2018

• Op-ed: Do editors have the right to be forgotten?

• Featured content: Wars, sieges, disasters and everything black possible

• Recent research: Automated Q&A from Wikipedia articles; Who succeeds in talk page discussions?

• Blog: New monthly dataset shows where people fall into Wikipedia rabbit holes

• Interview: Interview with The Rambling Man, Wikipedia's top contributor of Featured Lists

• Traffic report: TV, death, sports, and doodles

• Special report: Cochrane–Wikipedia Initiative

• Arbitration report: New cases requested for inter-editor hostility and other collaboration issues

• In the media: Solving crime; editing out violence allegations

• Humour: You really are in Wonderland

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:12, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Goa??

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

This is the press release by Kadamba Coterie after their sentiments were hurt in Velliapura in 2013. Velim, 11 kilometers from Margao, South Goa. Dec. 21st 2013. Mr.Venkatesha A. Upadhiaya today submitted a memorandum to the President of India Mr.Pranab Mukherjee, Prime Minister Mr.Manmohan Singh and Mr. Pravin Srivastava of Archeological Survey of India ASI, demanded to immediately acquire and save the 12th century, Kadamba Jayakeshi Southern Capital Velimpura site which is also the cremation ground of the last Ruler of Hangal located in present day Velim, South Goa a place of National Interest? from the possession of Mrs Ana Emerita, widow of a great Goan, late Roqiue Santana charging her for constructing on the scared grounds, denying access by locking the compound gates and playing regional card with the pilgrims from the neighboring villages of Karnataka who visit Velim once a year, a centuries old practice and as part of the Banavasi festival celebrations to pay their respect to the 1368AD Velimpura cremation ground of Purandarai-Deva the ruler of Hangal.

Warning the locals who were present here today not to be silent spectators to injustice done to the glorious historical past Mr. Upadhiaya a native of Belgaum lamented while reacting to regionalism that prior to his death in 2007 Roqiue Santana like his father in Portuguese colonial times always gave a warm welcome and supply of drinking water as a gesture of respect to the Kannada visitors at the site. Roqiue Santana popularly known as Father of Goa’s Democracy was the local elected representative to liberated Goa legislative Assembly. No doubt this family is Goan, like thousands of Goans they are of Deccan origin too?. Mr. Upadhiaya said.

Earlier, a man who walked up behind the secured gates calling himself the security for the Roqiue Santana family charged last years pilgrims of criminal mischief, theft and robbery as important antiques went missing following last Dec. pilgrims visit and said that the family has moved out of this country and ordered the driver of the tour bus to get going. Leading the pilgrims Mr. Upadhiaya? 82, denied? the allegation here today in Velim saying? that we are always protective of the family and do respect their privacy and recollected his family?s ancestors ties as Sarva-Karyakartas meaning chief secretary, a hereditary appointment up to the time when Governor of Madras presidency George Harris under Lord Dalhousie administration confiscated the Haliyal Timber and Construction Lime Co. goods of Roqiue Santan’s greatgrand father in Nov of 1855. Mr. Upadhiaya held that most of the pilgrims are the descendants of the? family?s Haliyal compound work force. Historians hold that Haliyal yard was basically? Goa? ruling Reigns Armoury and is today converted into Haliyal Bus Terminal. In his memorandum he urged Archeological? Survey Of India (ASI) to atleast save this Velim landmark for future generations.

According to this famous historical source held sacred by Hangal Coterie, Purandarai ruler of Hangal and family on the eve of his fall in 1347 secretly traveled over night to joined his daughter who herself took shelter in safer Jayakeshi Velimpura compound in 1345 when her husband was assassinated by Mohammedans at present day Chandor. A second wall stone Kannada inscription dated 1396 in the Velim compound marks the death and cremation of? Veenomai-Devi beauty and wife of? Suriya-Deva, slain Sovereign at Chandrapur palace, daughter of Late Purandaraideva, Kadambarasa of Hangal confirms this history. It can be infered from the Velim inscription that Goa Kadamba Suriya-Deva son of Beera, was married to the nearby royal bride who was his distance cousin. Mr. Upadhiaya said. Before adopting Portuguese Catholicism

Mr. Upadhiaya said. Before adopting Portuguese Catholicism this Velimpura family’s ancestors had given up worship in their temples for fear of Mohammedan trap, reinvented themselves as Haliyal timber lords where converted by Orthodox Nasranis of Malabar in early1400s.Some of the Syrian origin worship items and anointing oil alabastrons saved by Upadhiaya's great grand father and moved to Belgaum after the 1855 British confiscation of Haliyal compound is convincing evidence. Further, quoting Kannada stone inscriptions on Konkan sea pirate Timu 'enemy turned friend' recovered from present day Haliyal Bus stand tell that Timu in those crucial years provided protection for their ancestors in return for timber for his shipbuilding needs had exploited this converts fear issue and used Portuguese forces to drive Mohammedans away and enforced his Timu administration in Goa in 1510. The Portuguese? in a while overpowered Timu and colonized Goa. It is a well known historical conclusion that this Christian connection attracted early Jesuits including Francis Xavier to visit Velliapura first for refreshment before traveling inland for conversions, he added.

Prof. Nilkanth Sah Paddaam in this press release said here today that a six member delegation headed by Mr. Upadhiaya is leaving for New Delhi tomorrow to follow up with his memorandum. Dec/2013 Deccan Herald, Press Release/Nilkanth Sah Paddaam, Belgaum. Decan.reporter (talk) 15:33, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians, when you hit/click the reference please scroll down to this title:- ‘Roque Santana anniversary observed ‘ . PANJIM, 11th Jun 2013: The 51st anniversary of the ‘Father of Goan Democracy’ late Roque Santana Fernandes who went on an indefinite hunger strike in Margao in 1962 which resulted in elections being declared for the first time in Goa in December 1963 was observed in Velim, Monday.

The late Roque Santana resorted to a fast unto death demanding that elected members and not appointed ones should represent Goa in Parliament, with the result that Gopal Handoo, adviser to then Lt Governor of Goa met him at the instance of then prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru. He gave up the strike, met Nehru and it was agreed to hold elections for the first time in Goa in 1963. It is for the democratic fight that he was hailed as the `Father of Goan Democracy.’

Late Roque Santana was subsequently elected to Goa Assembly twice in 1967 and 1971 and was awarded Tambra Patra for his contribution for Goa’s freedom. Decan.reporter (talk) 16:30, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Press releases are not suitable sources because they are never independent and never neutral. And please, respect the privacy of the children. The Banner talk 17:06, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Banner, those child pics are from 1998. they are adults now. I had to go through lot of hard ships to get them as you may know the Velliapura place is not accessible. People love them, but they are not seen in public Decan.reporter (talk) 15:22, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

So these pictures are not your own work? The Banner talk 17:17, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Manual of style (references)

HI Banner, Thanks for this correction, I will remember when I edit next time. Thanks According to the manual of style, references are placed at the end of a sentence not in a sentence. Effect is that the closing point of a sentence should be placed before the reference. Thank you. The Banner talk 13:13, 6 February 2018 (UTC) Decan.reporter (talk) 16:15, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Manual of style (birth)

hi Banner

the Edit i did on Remo Fernandes i noticed his birth is recorded twice so i edited. and he is a Goan what was wrong there or ..... Decan.reporter (talk) 16:51, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

ok....ok

why did you remopve Goa   linked to Goan

from Remo fernandesDecan.reporter (talk) 22:00, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

the present text is Luís Remo de Maria Bernardo Fernandes (Goa, 8 May 1953), ... which is correct. The infobox is a summery of the article, so a mention of his date and place of birth there is correct. The Banner talk 22:20, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Following pages

show me how to do that....

There is no need to copy every edit of me back to my talk page. I can read your replies here. The Banner talk 17:18, 6 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Decan.reporter (talk • contribs)

Kadambas of Goa

To The Banner Hi there, How are you? somebody wrote to me that you deleted in sub section..... 'See also' why? they are all conected ancient attack in Chandor and Goa Velha the Queen is taken in to hiding in Velim , Goa etc etc. Decan.reporter (talk) 15:18, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

I have not a clue where you are talking about. Could you please link the relevant article ad could you please improve your English? The Banner talk 15:26, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Please stop with your annoying lines

Kadambas of Goa sub section

'see also'

or

chech what you deleted in Kadambas of Goa.

why cannot you do that.... ok I will improve my English Thank you. Decan.reporter (talk) 19:11, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

What I have removed are misleading links, often already linked elsewhere in the article. The Banner talk 19:20, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Photos

Hi

The Banner

Pics... why are you after my pics I am not billing ....anybody

do you need some rare pics that you can upload?

Decan.reporter (talk) 19:33, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

You said before that you had a hard time getting them, giving severe doubt to that fact that you are the owner of the copyright on these photos. "Have them" is not the same as "owning the copyright" (the photographer has that). The Banner talk 20:05, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

The Banner The Banner

The Prince/ RajKumar/ of Velliapura is the father/brother/Uncle who took the pics is 'the photographer' is not interested in exercising any control.

what else you want?

Decan.reporter (talk) 15:19, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

That means you have uploaded the photo's under false pretences by claiming that it was "own work". It is not your work, nor are you the copyright holder. Sorry. The Banner talk 18:59, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

its my work now, now I am the owner, copy right holder of all those pics The Prince/ RajKumar/ of Velliapura is the father/brother/Uncle who took the pics is 'the photographer' is not interested in exercising any control. Decan.reporter (talk) 19:37, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

how its not my own work? I did the touchup for disfiguring and reprinted from the origin photo. the photographer' is not interested in exercising any control. Decan.reporter (talk) 20:00, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Altering a photo or owning a photo does not give you the copyright. The Banner talk 20:10, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

the exclusive legal right, given to an assignee to print by an originator

Decan.reporter (talk) 20:18, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

My advice is to start reading Copyright, Wikipedia:Copyrights and Copyright law of the United States. Unless you can prove it, in writing, that you are the copyright owner (who by law is the producer of the creative work, i.e. the photographer, not you.), you do not acquire the copyright by possessing the photos. Beside that, you claim of "own work" is clearly false as "own work" in relation to copy right means "I produced the creative work". The Banner talk 20:59, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Stop bullying

I know you don't like me, but please stop bullying me with nominating articles of Olympic articles for deletion without a proper reason (Rina Bjarnason, Janni Bach, Bernd Metzke, Andreas Neitzel. Please read WP:NOLYMPICS. You are also told already many times to read WP:Before. Sander.v.Ginkel ^(Talk) 15:53, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

My friend, you have used a sockpuppet to circumvent the project to check your dodgy articles. And now you are again restoring your own articles with the same trouble as before. The Banner talk 16:05, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

What I tried to explain, you're nominating articles without a fair reason. And still you are not giving fair reasons to start these Afd's. Sander.v.Ginkel ^(Talk) 16:20, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

I can understand that you want to protect your own articles from serious scrutiny, but there is something called User:Aymatth2/SvG clean-up which you circumvented with a sockpuppet. Do you really think I can assume good faith here? In that case, you are way off. The Banner talk 16:25, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

What I tried to explain, you're nominating articles without a fair reason. And still you are not giving fair reasons to start these Afd's. Sander.v.Ginkel ^(Talk) 16:33, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

As if using sockpuppets is a fair way of protecting your sloppy articles. But I know. the issue is now solved, hope that you enjoy your other hobbies. The Banner talk 12:17, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

• Banner, please stop nominating these articles for AFDs and instead start an AN thread about the socking with the dutch-SPI-findings.~ Winged Blades^Godric 16:44, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
  • I will do that, but I am unsure if this will happen today. (Real life commitments and so.) The Banner talk 16:51, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

meta:Stewards/Elections 2018/Votes/Wiki13

Hello Banner, please remove away 1 of your additional extra votes as you have attended the stewards election at Meta-Wiki site. See also your talk page have received the messages over there, thank you. SA 13 Bro (talk) 20:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

 Done The Banner talk 00:33, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Professional?

He's clearly not a professional, just someone with an agenda. Googling on an old bio will show you the way... 32.218.46.140 (talk) 23:41, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2018

• News and notes: The future is Swedish with a lack of administrators

• Recent research: Politically diverse editors write better articles; Reddit and Stack Overflow benefit from Wikipedia but don't give back

• Arbitration report: Arbitration committee prepares to examine two new cases

• Traffic report: Addicted to sports and pain

• Featured content: Entertainment, sports and history

• Technology report: Paragraph-based edit conflict screen; broken thanks

• Humour: Impossible and unexplained traffic report

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

DRN notice

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Jzsj (talk) 21:57, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

The Burren - Burrenbeo Trust citation query

Hi, I've returned after a short break to find a twice-reverted citation issue on my watchlist. As no one is proposing to remove content, this was a belt-and-braces kind of citation anyway, but I wanted to understand the point, as in all the good work on the Burren article in recent times, I would certainly have considered the Burrenbeo Trust, one of the most active and influential of Burren conservation charities, to be a potential source, as they actually do have quite a bit of expertise. The reason for deleting the citation was given as: "marketing-website is not a reliable source. Beside that, it is not an independent website but related to a major player in the marketing and funding" - but this is not a marketing body (they promote good agri-practice, historical methods, community events, and such like). As I gather you moved to live in the place, and have some local insight, can you clarify the problem with this potential source? Thanks SeoR (talk) 20:54, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

The issue at hand is that The Burren is subject to a strong marketing drive to bring tourists in. Companies and groups are well organized to bring as much tourists and subsidies in as possible. That is more important that details as farming and geological matters. The Banner talk 21:04, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

I am not a local in The Burren but a neighbour from co. Clare. The Banner talk 21:06, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the note - and yes, I understand there is a lot of promotion of the Burren, which I see as harmless as long as people stick to facts and not fairy tales - and good to understand your context. But, and sorry if I am missing something, in what way does this fact impact the validity of an eco-charity as a reference source? No rush, I see no urgent need to add back one citation, but so I understand whether I might rely on their materials in some way. Now off to other parts of Ireland...SeoR (talk) 20:14, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Blocked IP

Turns out it was yet another Apollo sock... Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:54, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Hmmmm, I better start reading about his antics so that I recognize him a bit earlier. Is making a dossier legal on WP? The Banner talk 15:09, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Sander.v.Ginkel

Just ran into two volleyball biographies that incorrectly stated the athletes were retired (unsourced, as well) created by Sander.v.Ginkel. Is there a cleanup section for the articles he created etc.? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 15:00, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

I am not sure if their is a specific section for cleanup, I have to look that up. But please, if you can improve a dodgy SvG-articxle: do not hesitate to improve it straight away! The Banner talk 15:38, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

By the way: both drafts were replaced in main space before a check was done. The editor doing that was later identified as a disruptive sockpuppeteer. The Banner talk 15:40, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Its a complete mess. I fixed two articles I came across. However, there probably is much more out there. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:59, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it is. Most of his articles are dodgy but were protected by the sheer fact that theyr were about Olympians. But a lot of them were not covered by the sources (in violation of WP:BLP) or were plain copied (copyvio). To protect his mess, he even used a sockpuppet to avoid scrutiny. Beatley is another socjkpuppet, but in this case from somebody else. Still he did a lot of damage as all the articles he had moved back to mainspace need to be checked. See: User:Aymatth2/SvG clean-up/Audit notes/Beatley moves. Thanks for your efforts! The Banner talk 08:23, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

stalking

If you continue stalking I will report you to the authorities.80.111.226.8 (talk) 21:21, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

I just have a few articles on my watchlist, my friend. Go on like this, and you will be blocked again quite soon. The Banner talk 21:23, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

For breaching what rules exactly?80.111.226.8 (talk) 21:24, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Edit warring (again), disruptive editing (again), personal attacks...

Block is already requested! The Banner talk 21:31, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Do you think I am fucking stupid? Its obvious you are following me around. Editing on multiple articles you have never edited before that are not a part of a subject you edit? Well that isnt suspicious at all!!!! Keep this up and I will be requesting a restraining order and a hefty block, friend.80.111.226.8 (talk) 21:38, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

A watchlist is indeed not suspicious. But disruptive editing, personal attacks etc. is a good way to get yourself blocked. The Banner talk 21:41, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Ok, friend. If you keep stalking/harassing me we will just see what happens. OK, friend?80.111.226.8 (talk) 21:42, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

If you continue with these allegations, it is you who will face the consequences. No matter how often you change of IP-number. The Banner talk 21:45, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

I didnt know you had an interest in Soviet history or LGBT history. Now isnt that a bizarre coincidence that two editors would share two queer interests like that?80.111.226.8 (talk) 21:48, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

There is so much you do not know about me. Be ready for a few more surprises... The Banner talk 21:53, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Is that a threat80.111.226.8 (talk) 21:56, 21 March 2018 (UTC)?

Not at all. I just tell you that you do not know me so it is quite possible that my broad interest will spring you a few surprises. I still have more than 3000 pages on my watchlist. The Banner talk 21:58, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Interesting that they admit here that Yakov Dzhugashvili is Soviet rather than Georgian... ;-) Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 22:49, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

He was a Soviet citizen, obviously.80.111.226.8 (talk) 23:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to the submission 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 the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 06:28, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

British Isles Naming Dispute

Hello!

You've taken to reverting my edits! Please feel free to state your case!

198.103.221.52 (talk) 17:06, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I did. Because your edits were not neutral. By the way, I did not see any explanation on the talkpage of the article what is beneficial in adding non-neutral information and where you got the right to start an edit war.The Banner talk 17:07, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

My edits were simple removals of the POV insertions of a previous editor, who himself had not offered any information or discussion to base his edits on. Please explain how you came to the conclusion that I had violated POV. If you like, I can provide sources to substantiate my point when we discuss it.198.103.152.51 (talk) 17:13, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

You can add your sources right now. That is to say, when you have them... The Banner talk 17:15, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Of course, what part would you like a source on? And also, substantiate your reversions of my reversions of NPOV content please.198.103.223.51 (talk) 17:40, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

For everyone of your changes. The Banner talk 18:38, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018

• Op-ed: Death knell for The Signpost?

• News and notes: Wiki Conference roundup and new appointments.

• Arbitration report: Ironing out issues in infoboxes; not sure yet about New Jersey; and an administrator who probably wasn't uncivil to a sockpuppet.

• In the media: The media on Wikipedia's workings: the good and not-so-good

• Traffic report: Real sports, real women and an imaginary country: what's on top for Wikipedia readers

• Featured content: Animals, Ships, and Songs

• Technology report: Timeless skin review by Force Radical.

• Special report: ACTRIAL wrap-up.

• Humour: WikiWorld Reruns

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:49, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

1st Regiment

Hi The Banner, thanks for fixing my mistake on 1st Regiment. The article does show up on maintenance pages, which is why I ended up there in the first place. It links to 1st Infantry Division (disambiguation) which is itself an ambiguous term that redirects to 1st Division. I had intended to change the link to [[1st Division (disambiguation)#Infantry divisions|1st Infantry Division (disambiguation)]] but left out the critical '(disambiguation)'. If you have no objection, I'll make the correct edit. Leschnei (talk) 12:15, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

UPA

The links you gave make hardly any mention of people considering Vatutin being a liberator. One does, and that was about renaming a street named after him because people felt he was not a liberator. And the one in French cannot be translated. I will correct your mistake tomorrow when I get the chance.

Your reading is poor my friend, as every page and article names him a liberator or involved in liberation. But do not bother about the article, as it is protected for a few months. The Banner talk 00:42, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

And thank you for confirming that you are a sockpuppet and avoiding a block. The Banner talk 08:24, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello, @The Banner: I see you already had a problem with Anone User talk:71.121.248.91. Now he is at edit wars with personal attacks in the article Taras Bulba-Borovets. Could you help me in this situation? I'm new and I do not know who to contact.--Nicoljaus (talk) 09:01, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Section Blanking

Instead of section blanking the company pages of Star India and Zee Entertainment Enterprises which is really unhelpful, cant you just put a tag on top that the page needs to be edited better? You just seem to be bulldozing the edits on people who don't get your point of view. List of Sony trademarks is an example of page where notable original brands of a particular company is listed in comprehensive manner.JayB91 (talk) 22:04, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Okay, next time I will bring the editors to the COI notice board. By the way, I am not the only one removing the spam. The Banner talk 22:38, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

"Cookies make the world a better place" – Lionel(talk) 08:55, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Channel for discussion

Good afternoon Banner,

Is it possible to open a channel for discussion with you that's separate from a Talk page, or is that the only avenue?

Regards, Sosialpath (talk) 21:56, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

No. The Banner talk 01:34, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the WP:DRN regarding your tagging of an article. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "thread name".The discussion is about the topic Channel NewsAsia. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --Sosialpath (talk) 04:53, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Forum shopping The Banner talk 10:44, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 27

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 27, February – March 2018

• #1Lib1Ref
• New collections
  • Alexander Street (expansion)
  • Cambridge University Press (expansion)
• User Group
• Global branches update
  • Wiki Indaba Wikipedia + Library Discussions
• Spotlight: Using librarianship to create a more equitable internet: LGBTQ+ advocacy as a wiki-librarian
• Bytes in brief

Arabic, Chinese and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:50, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Mark Z. Jacobson

I filed a request, see WP:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Mark_Z._Jacobson#Intro_discussion Rwbest (talk) 08:51, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

The first of April is already gone. The Banner talk 09:28, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Dasarahalli

Thank you for fixing links to Dasarahalli. Please could you check my edit to {{Bangalore topics}}? After looking at what you have done, I think I may have got that one wrong. Thanks, Certes (talk) 23:18, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2018

• From the editors: The Signpost's presses roll again

• Signpost: Future directions for The Signpost

• News and notes: Photo of Kim Jong-un. Stephen Hawking death tops hits on many Wikipedias.

• In the media: The rise of Wikipedia as a disinformation mop

• In focus: Admin reports board under criticism

• Special report: ACTRIAL results adopted by landslide

• Opinion: Guideline for Organization Notability revised

• Op-ed: World War II Myth-making and Wikipedia

• Community view: It's time we look past Women in Red to counter systemic bias

• Discussion report: The future of portals

• Arbitration report: No new cases, and one motion on administrative misconduct

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Military History

• Blog: Why the world reads Wikipedia

• Humour: Our Favorite Places to Whine About Stuff

• Traffic report: A quiet place to wrestle with the articles of March

• Technology report: Coming soon: Books-to-PDF, interactive maps, rollback confirmation

• Featured content: Featured content selected by the community

• Gallery: A look at some famous and not as well-known border tripoints

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:49, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Glyphosate

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all pages relating to genetically modified organisms, commercially produced agricultural chemicals and the companies that produce them, broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

--Tryptofish (talk) 19:29, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

You confirm my words with this templating... The Banner talk 20:08, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#The Banner. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:06, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

British Isles Naming Dispute - Talk Page

Please don't leave nonsense messages on my talk page and please refrain from removing discussion on Talk Page articles.Hibarnacle (talk) 19:42, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Please refrain from posting nonsense messages on my talk page as I am not aware that I have removed something. The Banner talk 21:45, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Then don't leave messages on other users' talk pages saying you DID remove their input:

"Information icon Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Talk:British Isles naming dispute, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. The Banner talk 09:19, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Get a hold of yourself for God's sake.Hibarnacle (talk) 21:59, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

And of course, you did not check out the truth to back up your words... The Banner talk 22:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Stop acting like a petulant child. You just got caught doing something you said you didn't, at the very least have the integrity to accept you were wrong.Hibarnacle (talk) 00:01, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

/me keeps mirror up

In all the discussion about Bastun you come with nice stories but you fail to back that up. And here again you come with nice stores but fails yo back that up. Please... The Banner talk 00:10, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

You are topic-banned from everything related to genetically modified organisms, commercially produced agricultural chemicals and the companies that produce them. You are invited to request review of this sanction after six-months of productive, conflict-free editing in other topic areas.

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/Genetically modified organisms#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. Sandstein 18:39, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the notification. The Banner talk 21:36, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Something off my chest...

It is not an excuse or a claim for mercy. Just a frustrating fact that I again have fallen into the trap of my own body. Disclosure: I am again in a depression, a type of depression causing - amongst others - loss of self-control. I am aware that my block log and my depressions have a close relationship, but even that realisation comes on hindsight.

Now, on the eve of what looks to be an indefinite block, I just have to admit that I am again let down by my body. Medication works far too slow, fighting back on my own is far quicker. But the pitfall is there... The Banner talk 13:24, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

You do a lot of good work on Wikipedia, even I will admit that, and you do have my sympathy for your med issue, but perhaps in the light of your new TB you will be able to be less aggressive in your comments in other areas. The danger is that patterns can lead to other sanctions if they appesr to be recurring or systemic. Please take this in the most friendly way possible. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:26, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Incomplete AfD nomination

Hi, I saw that you tried to nominate Rohtas Educational and Associated Programs for deletion, but because you failed to create Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rohtas Educational and Associated Programs, the nomination was incomplete, so I removed the notice on the page and the entry in the AFD log you created. I would be happy to complete the nomination for you, but I can't do so without your reasons for wanting the article deleted. If you still want to go ahead, reply to this message here, or on my user talk page, and I'll be happy to help you out. Iffy★Chat -- 10:19, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

I take a look. The Banner talk 11:23, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

By the way: usually a bot fixes missed AfD when Twinkle fails. Now I had to do it manually... The Banner talk 11:39, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

quick question

Why did you remove the name of the child from Ann Lovett page - he wasn't baptised but baptism is a christian concept not necessary for the naming of a child. ☕ Antiqueight ^haver 12:53, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

The name is coming out of the blue with no evidence that the stillborn baby really got a name from father or mother. Last year I translated the page into Dutch but when checking the sources I could not find a name for the baby. The Irish Times article indeed mentions the name Patrick, but where is the name coming from? More then likely it is just a "work name", to make the case less anonymous. The Banner talk 14:47, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Ah, that's different from no baptism. I had seen the name mentioned in the article but wasn't looking to update the page. I was just surprised by the reason. ☕ Antiqueight ^haver 18:03, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

As far as I know, stillborn children are not baptised. I am not sure if you can register a stillborn baby at the Registry Office. The Banner talk 20:04, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Neither is required for a family to give the child a name. I know people who lost the baby before that, knew it was going to happen and the baby had a name. ☕ Antiqueight ^haver 21:06, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

But the use in the infobox suggests that it is an official name and that is not the case. It is not even clear where that name is coming from. Who named him? Ann? Ricky? The grandparents? The coroner? The Banner talk 21:09, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Star Suvarna

I noticed you'd redirected Star Suvarna to Star India last year. It was just recreated (in a promotional and unencyclopedic way) and I reverted back to your previously created redirect. Just wanted to put this on your radar in case it continues to get recreated (in which case perhaps an AFD/SALT would be in order?) Marquardtika (talk) 05:02, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Discussion on secondary schools again

There's been a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#Schools_in,_forever thread, where the subject of notability for secondary schools have come up again. Thanks. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 May 2018

• From the editor: Another issue meets the deadline

• Op-ed: Has the wind gone out of the AdminShip's sails?

• Opinion: Integrating my many lives on Wikipedia

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Portals

• Discussion report: User rights, infoboxes, and more discussion on portals

• Featured content: Featured content selected by the community

• Arbitration report: Managing difficult topics

• News and notes: Lots of Wikimedia

• In the media: Wikipedia in Turkish politics; COI politics in Wikipedia; most cited work

• Traffic report: We love our superheroes

• Technology report: A trove of contributor and developer goodies

• Blog: Why I write about women on Wikipedia

• Recent research: Why people don't contribute to Wikipedia; using Wikipedia to teach statistics, technical writing, and controversial issues

• Humour: Play with your food

• Gallery: Wine not?

• From the archives: The Signpost scoops The Signpost

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:25, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

May 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Gordon Ramsay. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Tiderolls 18:19, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

You have nothing better to do than warn after just two reverts and while the relevant discussion was already opened? The Banner talk 18:31, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

On the contrary, I have many better things to do. However, your refusal to abide by policy is distracting me You've done great work for this project but if you believe that reverting while discussing is not edit warring then we'll have much more conversation in the near future. Wait...for...consensus. Tiderolls 18:38, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Please, look at the talkpage... The Banner talk 19:11, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Request for consensus on capitalization of "independent"

Hi, you may be able to provide insight on the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Politics and government#Stylistic question about capitalization of "independent" in an infobox. It's clear that "independent" should not be capitalized in a sentence (except if it's the first word), as is the usage in Independent politician, because it is a common noun and not a proper noun, like Republican. Should it be capitalized in an infobox or when it's abreviated in parentheses, i.e. Bernie Sanders (i) vs Bernie Sanders (I)? I look forward to your thoughts at the talk page, above. Sincerely, HopsonRoad (talk) 22:05, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Request for Consensus: Victoria Junior College

Hello. I'm reaching out to clarify the supposed promotional content on the Wikipedia page. All content in the introduction is factual and derived from the actual article itself. Additional citations have been added to the page. Please do not begin an edit war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.15.77.31 (talk) 00:24, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

For starters: information must be relevant and backed up by independent, reliable sources. The school website is NOT an independent source. Beside that, the article must be neutral in style and tone. It is also highly discouraged to write about subjects that can lead to a Conflict of Interest. The Banner talk 00:29, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

• What Banner says: information needs to be relevant and properly verified. Drmies (talk) 00:50, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Several years ago

The article Theories of humor is marked for expert attention, and I noticed that you tried to assist the article several years ago from vandalism. If this article is to be edited or re-written seriously then the general outline would look something like Theories or Humor from the three main general perspectives of the (i) the historical school study of the theory of humor, (ii) the literary school study of the theory of humor, and (iii) the psychological school study of the theory of humor. The current article is so far off the mark that it is little more than a unorganized random list of enumerated theories. The article could be deleted or at least re-titled perhaps as a preliminary form of a psychological school study of the theory of humor, and this is being generous. The current title for the article is mis-representative of the article's content, and I was wondering if you could offer a second opinion. Do you see the article in its current form as being a good and useful article? FutureForecasts (talk) 15:42, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

sorry, out of my scope. The Banner talk 17:34, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Mysterious revert

Re this: neither have I. I have no memory of it and it does not concern my work in any way. Sorry. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:20, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Looks to me like a mis-click or something like that. No worries. The Banner talk 13:33, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Sectarian Supporters on The Troubles Page

Hello. I would like to ask how you feel the sources I have referenced and likewise cited on the aforementioned article are in your words not reliable. They come from a variety of news outlets, as well as published works by journalist and academics alike.

Sincerely, Simon Levchenko (talk) 23:57, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

You better realize that you have broken the 1-revert rule on this article as you are only allowed one revert per 24 hours. You have two now... The Banner talk 00:00, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

And please note that you info was removed - in part - due to dubious relevancy. The Banner talk 00:01, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

With all due respect - that is a statement of subjective conjecture. I would appreciate if you specified your reasoning for such, and likewise the other issues you believe the edit brings about.

Sincerely, Simon Levchenko (talk) 00:07, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Always handy to accuse others of subjectivity when you have no real arguments. The Banner talk 09:39, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

I am myself confused by your own statement. I stated my arguments for inclusion above. What is your objection to including verified facts, that prove sectarianism was supported through crime.

Simon Levchenko (talk) 16:23, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Why are you discussing this here, rather than on the article's talk page? That's what article talk pages are for. And holding it in the right place invites wider participation from interested editors. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 17:21, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Moving to the talk page.Simon Levchenko (talk) 19:07, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

DS notices

Just as a note regarding the above, the DS notice you didn't leave means they were not properly warned and thus a 1RR block is not possible (yet). They have now been sufficiently warned. Primefac (talk) 00:37, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

I was utterly confused by the warning the filter gave. The Banner talk 08:54, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 28

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 28, April – May 2018

• #1Bib1Ref
• New partners
  • Rock's Backpages
  • Invaluable
  • Termsoup
• User Group update
• Global branches update
  • Wikipedia Library global coordinators' meeting
• Spotlight: What are the ten most cited sources on Wikipedia? Let's ask the data
• Bytes in brief

Arabic, Chinese, Hindi, Italian and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:33, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 June 2018

• From the editor: The Admin Ship is still barely afloat, while a Foundation project risks sinking

• Special report: NPR and AfC – The Marshall Plan: an engagement and a marriage?

• Op-ed: What do admins do?

• Opinion: Google isn't responsible for Wikipedia's mistakes

• News and notes: Money, milestones, and Wikimania

• In the media: Much wikilove from the Mayor of London, less from Paekākāriki or a certain candidate for U.S. Congress

• Discussion report: Deletion, page moves, and an update to the main page

• Featured content: New promotions

• Arbitration report: WWII, UK politics, and a user deCrat'ed

• Traffic report: Endgame

• Technology report: Improvements piled on more improvements

• Gallery: Wiki Loves Africa

• Blog: Wikipedia should be open for editors in Turkey

• Recent research: How censorship can backfire and conversations can go awry

• Humour: Television plot lines

• Wikipedia essays: This month's pick by The Signpost editors

• From the archives: Wolves nip at Wikipedia's heels: A perspective on the cost of paid editing

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:29, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Recapture of Goa

You've listed this at WP:RFPP for create protection. Is there evidence that should cause us to believe there's a risk? Admins are usually not supposed to protect pre-emptively. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 21:42, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

See here. The Banner talk 22:20, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

I have semiprotected Annexation of Goa instead. Hope that is of some help. EdJohnston (talk) 23:15, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

We will see. The Banner talk 09:01, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Irish Language Education navigation box.

I have just added a link to the navigation box you created on the pages of the Gaelscoileanna, both primary and secondary on it. I still don't understand how to edit the box itself again. Could you do me a favour and delete the link to Coláiste na Rinne under "Secondary schools" on it- because the link is to the Wikipedia page on Ring/An Rinn and not to the school? Darren J. Prior (talk) 01:22, 29 June 2018 (UTC)Darren J. PriorDarren J. Prior (talk) 01:22, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

The reason is that there is no article about the school itself. You can overwrite the redirect by writing an article but makes sure it is well sourced. The Banner talk 22:07, 2 July 2018 (UTC) Sorry for the late reply. Busy times.

Talkback

Hello, The Banner. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National English School, Kolkata.
Message added 19:58, 7 July 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

DBigXray 19:58, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Ibis

To The Banner: See Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:List_of_airliner_shootdown_incidents#BOAC_Flight_777, --Otto (talk) 21:58, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Nice try to push your opinion. The Banner talk 22:02, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Suggestion

Next for deletion: St._Joseph's_Community_College,_Bangalore .96.127.242.226 (talk) 23:44, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

and another: Loyola Jesuit Secondary School, Malawi. 96.127.242.226 (talk) 20:20, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

I suggest that you register an account and do the nominations yourself. The Banner talk 20:45, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

List of Sindhi people

Hello, Your movement of page List of Sindhi people needs proper discussion. Please discuss Talk:List of Sindhi people before moving the page again. Thank you. JayB91 (talk) 18:09, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

I would have been nice when you had read my edit on the talkpage of the article before you moved the article again. That edit was there before you made your move. Do not blame me for your own mistakes. The Banner talk 18:22, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Template TV Network

Hey, I edited Template:Network 18 to include what I believe was useful info but it was reverted as being "superfluous". Other similar TV network templates do already carry such info (for example Template:Turner Broadcasting System, Template:NBC). Can you tell me why it was removed exactly. Thanks. Gotitbro (talk) 23:22, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. The fact that other templates are substandard should not be a reason to make more templates substandard. A navigation template should only act voor navigation, it is not an article. The Banner talk 07:08, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

I see, thanks for clarifying. I was just following of what I believed to be standard practice. Gotitbro (talk) 16:44, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

AfD

I don't really care about your mission against pools.. What will happen one day however, my friend, is that someone will simply slam you with yet another a block for your persistent incivility, personal attacks, and battleground mentality. And it won't need to go to ANI, and it won't need to be me. And it will be longer next time. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:25, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Getting desperate that your arguments do not hold sway? It is getting a nice tradition of accusing some one to have a battlefield mentality when you run out of polkicy/guidelined-based arguments. The Banner talk 11:41, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

removed program without article, deemed not notable

I noticed that on the page Comparison of SSH servers you had removed a couple "programs" ("libraries" would probably be a better term) due to them lacking their own articles. If they had their own articles, would it be more acceptable if they were included on that page?

Alternatively, I noticed that some of the libraries listed on other technical articles comparing protocol implementations do not have their own articles but instead link back to the parent company's article. An example is the "Tectia" library, which has a link back to their company SSH Communications Security instead of a standalone article for the library. Would this be an acceptable way to add libraries to the Comparison of SSH servers page?

--Alex Abrahamson (talk) 22:52, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

The standard is: no article, no mention.

I will check the other articles. The Banner talk 22:59, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2018

• From the editor: If only if

• Op-ed: The last leg of the Admin Ship's current cruise

• Opinion: Wrestling with Wikipedia reality

• News and notes: Another newspaper for Wikipedia; Wikimania 2018 ends; changes at NPR

• In the media: Blackouts in Europe; Wikipedia and capitalists; WMF Jet Set

• Discussion report: Wikipedias take action against EU copyright proposal, plus new user right proposals

• Featured content: Wikipedia's best content in images and prose

• Arbitration report: Status quo processes retained in two disputes

• Traffic report: Soccer, football, call it what you like – that and summer movies leave room for little else

• Technology report: New bots, new prefs

• Gallery: Independence days, national holidays, and football – all in July

• Blog: Motivation of two editors

• Recent research: Different Wikipedias use different images; editing contests more successful than edit-a-thons

• Humour: It's all the same

• Essay: Wikipedia does not need you

• From the archives: The pending changes fiasco: how an attempt to answer one question turned into a quagmire

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:51, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

re: RFC religion in infoboxes

First of all, you do understand that the religion parameter no longer works in the 'INFOBOX PERSON' template. That information recorded using that parameter is NOT visible in the article and has not been visble for a year and a half. You understand that my edit did not remove it from the article and that an UNDO of the edit will not make it reappear in the article. You understand that when that parameter was made inoperable (a year and a half ago), that it creates an error in the system which can be viewed in the article by clicking on the edit tab and then the show preview button. Those errors ultimately make their way to this report: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Infobox_person_using_religion.

As far as 'Destroying' information is concerned, as an experienced editor i'm sure that you realize that every version of the life cycle of an article is retained. Including everyone of the 150,000+ edits that you have made.

Are you really fighting to retain information that generates an error, and has not been visible in the article for ( a year and a half)? Gene Wilson (talk) 15:51, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

You clearly do not understand the effect of your removals. You are coldly removing info (albeit not visible any more) without rescuing the info elsewhere in the article. What I want is that you do not axe it out, but move the info to the article body where necessary. The Banner talk 17:21, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

To the contrary, I make a great effort not to as you say 'Coldly Axe Out' this unviewable information. Let's restate that - unviewable part. Many of the listings of the persons religion use citations to verify their statements. That citation relates to that specific fact in the INFOBOX. In many other cases, a named citation <ref name="xxxxx"> is defined in the INFOBOX and called upon in other locations in the article using <rêf name="xxxxx"/>. I move these citations to the body of the article and make sure they are working properly before I delete the information from the infobox. Try as you may, I am confident that I am not demonstrating some kind of reckless disregard for these articles. Gene Wilson (talk) 20:03, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Keep on dreaming. The Banner talk 09:49, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Jzsj COI discussion

I've opened a discussion about the {{COI}} tag you inserted at Talk:St. Xavier's Higher Secondary School, Thoothukudi. I've also listed the discussion at WP:COIN — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 22:25, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Davitt

Stop your edit warring on Michael Davitt and gain a consensus for deletion.80.111.16.75 (talk) 13:01, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Stop your edit warring on Michael Davitt and gain a consensus for your excessive quotation! The Banner talk 13:17, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

As you well know the onus is one those challenging the stable version to gain a consensus.80.111.16.75 (talk) 13:28, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

I see no attempt from you to gain consensus on the talkpage. What I do see is an IP in breach of WP:3RR and clearly editwarring. The Banner talk 13:31, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

And that gives you an excuse to ignore WP;BRD?80.111.16.75 (talk) 13:48, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

WP:BRD has something to do with trying to gain consensus first. Something you have not even tried... The Banner talk 13:53, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

August 2018

Hello, I'm The Banner. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Comparison of photogrammetry software have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. The Banner talk 13:01, 20 August 2018 (UTC) hello I'm Wizardxyz this makes me laught.... promotional? when you removed all the open sources software and revert every attempt to put them back and let only commercial solutions ? hahaha.... who is making promotion of what? this page is a listing of available softwares and helping comparison... nice to know that wikipedia is now a place for propriatary software.... you got reverted by several user on this page, you undone several time the request of listing this software... shall I report for moderation under 3RR rule violation?

You can laugh what you want but the article clearly states that it is only for programs with their own article. Your program has no article on Wikipedia... The Banner talk 15:53, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Persecution

I think it's great that you are persecuting crap articles.96.127.244.27 (talk) 04:09, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

If I was persecuting them, I would not have visited a Christmas concert in their church last December. And punched a Jesuit in the face instead of having a chat with him, as I did earlier this month. I disagree with they way they personally fill in their religion but I do not see them as the enemy. The accusation seems more a move to discredit me due to lack of arguments. The Banner talk 10:00, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 29

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 29, June – July 2018

• New partners
  • Economic & Political Weekly–10 accounts
• Wikimania
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

Hindi, Italian and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:03, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

FYI

It seems like g11 speedy is a good route, in some cases, for cleaning up this junk. 96.127.243.251 (talk) 18:40, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Wow, and here is a good block, finally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.127.243.251 (talk) 19:28, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Praise the Lord... The Banner talk 19:32, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Banner, let Christ be with you in your editing travels, (as long as he does not impinge on the reliability or independence of in-depth sources used to establish notability)!96.127.243.251 (talk) 21:37, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Religion is not my primary subject for editing. When I write about churches, most of the time it is about the buildings. The Banner talk 00:30, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

The writing about buildings gives you foundational knowledge in the area.96.127.243.251 (talk) 00:49, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

The block is lifted. And I came across a few educational institutions and straight away the "Community of Keep School Article At All Costs By Ignoring The Notability Guidelines" is at it. Very frustrating. The Banner talk 10:55, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

• it's time for ANI, as the competence and IDHT issues are large.96.127.244.27 (talk) 01:19, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
• I started an account. I guess it is better than IP editing. we'll see. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 22:49, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

FYI

Looks like a topic ban violation. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:01, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sysstat

The article Sysstat has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable. Doesn't meet WP:GNG. No significant coverage from reliable sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Newslinger talk 03:35, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

No objection. The Banner talk 09:44, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

WPCleaner 2.0

Installer for WPCleaner

Hello The Banner.

I would like to inform you that a new version of WPCleaner is available replacing the old version (v1.43) dating back to almost a year. Unfortunately, going from version 1.43 to 2.0 automatically isn't possible and will require a new installation. It's necessary to install version 2.0 to take advantage of updates and bug fixes. Version 1.43 will have to be uninstalled manually, as there are no more updates for it.

The installation procedure is described at Wikipedia:WPCleaner/Installation.

Note: for usage in Bot mode, I strongly advise to check the modifications to be sure that the tasks run correctly

--NicoV ^{(Talk on frwiki)} 16:05, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2018

• From the editor: Today's young adults don't know a world without Wikipedia

• Interview: 2018 Wikimedian of the Year, Farkhad Fatkullin

• News and notes: Flying high; low practice from Wikipedia 'cleansing' agency; where do our donations go? RfA sees a new trend

• In the media: Quicksilver AI writes articles

• Discussion report: Drafting an interface administrator policy

• Featured content: Featured content selected by the community

• Special report: Wikimania 2018

• Traffic report: Aretha dies – getting just 2,000 short of 5 million hits

• Technology report: Technical enhancements and a request to prioritize upcoming work

• Gallery: Leapfrog, historic Thai cave, and a rhythmic beat

• Recent research: Wehrmacht on Wikipedia, neural networks writing biographies

• Humour: Signpost editor censors herself

• Essay: Principle of Some Astonishment

• From the archives: Playing with Wikipedia words

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:03, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

)

Ireland revert

Hey there. I agree with your revert here, however I'm a little cautious around your edit summary. I notice you took my summary from previously and copied it verbatim. Not necessarily an issue in itself, everything posted to Wikipedia is up for grabs, but just need to prevent any drama of someone not liking their edits being reverted and going "look, sockpuppets they're obviously the same person using the same text." Now I think of it more I'm not sure it matters, but, you know, anyway I'm rambling now. Back to work. Canterbury Tail talk 11:03, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Revert on Mauro Collagreco (09.2018)

Hello there. I wanted to know why you have reverted all the edit from [[1]], and how I may validate this content. I've been commissioned by Mauro Collagreco himself to make these edits. Thanks for your reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki.chefs (talk • contribs) 21:42, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Simple:

1. Add a note you your user page that you have a Conflict of Interest and that you are writing on behalf and paid for by the subject. Please read: Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
2. Write in a neutral style and tone. Not the hallelujah-chorus you have used before.
3. Use independent (not in any way related to the subject), reliable (no social media), prior published sources.
4. This is an encyclopedia, not a human interest magazine. So keep it short and matter of fact.

Please keep in mind that paid editing is severely frowned upon and that responses against advertising and promotion by paid editors are swift and harsh. The Banner talk 22:03, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

    Just to be sure, does something like the last edit is good and along the lines you provided? Thanks for your help.

It is better, but it needs far more sources. The Banner talk 19:17, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

   I only edited 3 award. Thanks for your help, I'll keep going that way.

The Signpost: 1 October 2018

• From the editor: Is this the new normal?

• News and notes: European copyright law moves forward

• In the media: Knowledge under fire

• Discussion report: Interface Admin policy proposal, part 2

• Arbitration report: A quiet month for Arbcom

• Traffic report: John McCain's death generates over 7 million hits, followed by historical low

• Technology report: Paying attention to your mobile

• Gallery: A pat on the back

• Blog: After a catastrophic fire at the National Museum of Brazil, a drive to preserve what knowledge remains

• Recent research: How talk page use has changed since 2005; censorship shocks lead to centralization; is vandalism caused by workplace boredom?

• Humour: Signpost Crossword Puzzle

• Essay: Expressing thanks

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Derry Tower

Hello

Did you create the original entry?

It previously read 2008 and points to the recent 2018 discovery which our group is responsible for. That is the reason why the edit was created. It also points to the BBC website in which our group are credited.

Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susman121 (talk • contribs) 14:03, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

I made a type with the year, yes. But the local history group is not important enough to be mention in the article. Wikipedia is not for promotion. The Banner talk 15:54, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Derry Tower

The number of times the group's name is mentioned is hardly your issue.

It seems to me that you would have deleted it had we even mentioned it once.

I will leave you with the correction of your typo on the date and to enjoy your page.

I would have thought you would have wanted as much information from us as possible to help you develop the entry regarding this particular tower on your site, but obviously not.

Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susman121 (talk • contribs) 10:40, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

The encyclopedia needs relevant information, not as much as possible. Beside this, this is about a list what gives a summery overview of all the known round towers. There is nothing what will stop you from creating Derry Round Tower (as of yet a non-existing article) where you can put down all relevant information about the tower. The Banner talk 10:50, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Nizamani

Since you initiated the original AfD, please note Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nizamani (2nd nomination). I shall inform the other participant in that original discussion. - Sitush (talk) 14:31, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

The beginning of the war in Kosovo

Sorry. But I need to remember the pages to explain to all those controversial elements about the Kosovo war. Especially its beginning.

When did the war in Kosovo and Metohija begin? The first serious war conflict was an introduction to the village of Likosane, but it is questionable whether it was on February 27 or 28, 1998. Did the Drenica group of the KLA under the command of Adem Jashari start a partisan attack on the FRY Police on Friday evening before midnight on February 27th or the night between 27th and 28th of February or Saturday morning of February 28th, 1998? Albanians claim that the attack followed on February 28 in the early hours before dawn. Albanians celebrate February 28 as the day of the uprising against the "Serbian occupier". Serbs claim that on February 28, 1998, the Albanians launched the first synchronized "terrorist attack" against members of the security forces who launched the attack on Drenica on the same day, when on March 5 they liquidated Adem Jashari with 45 family members. The question remains whether the KLA members from Drenica attacked on February 27 evening or on the 28th of February in the morning. Everything related to this war is known. Nothing started spontaneously. Can you explain on Vikipedia more than three years the exact date of the beginning of the war conflict? Before Likosane, there was not a serious armed incident with a lot of dead policemen between Serbs and Albanians. In the period 1995, 1996 and 1997 there was sporadic shootings and criminal killings and occasional terrorist attacks on the police and Serb and Albanian civilians during human casualties, as well as an armed incident without casualties in the night between January 22nd and 23rd, 1998 Armed conflict in the chain began after the conflict in the village of Likosane and the whole political issue in Kosovo and Metohija was opened on the interstate scene. Each subsequent armed conflict took on warfare with substantially larger victims and displaced populations on both sides. It seems incredible that you do not know how to reconcile more than three years around the start of the war, and Serbs and Albanians can. Plus, you have all documents of all armed incidents. — Baba Mica (talk) 15:40, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

I have answered on the talk page of the article so everybody can see it. But is there any need to me more precise than "Late Februari 1998"?? The Banner talk 16:54, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Not sure if you

have seen this. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:04, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 30

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 30, August – Septmeber 2018

• Library Card translation
• Spotlight: 1Lib1Ref spreads to the Southern Hemisphere and beyond
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:43, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Help!

Hi, I need help! Can you please remove the subject of “conflict of interest” from my article? As a new user, i need to understand,right! Please help me removing this! It would be kind enough! Thank you Shaheba Sultana (talk) 07:07, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 October 2018

• From the editors: The Signpost is still afloat, just barely

• Op-ed: Wikipedia's Strickland affair

• News and notes: WMF gets a million bucks

• In the media: Bans, celebs, and bias

• Discussion report: Mediation Committee and proposed deletion reform

• Traffic report: Unsurprisingly, sport leads the field – or the ring

• Technology report: Bots galore!

• Special report: NPP needs you

• Special report 2: Now Wikidata is six

• In focus: Alexa

• Gallery: Out of this world!

• Recent research: Wikimedia Commons worth $28.9 billion

• Humour: Talk page humour

• Opinion: Strickland incident

• From the archives: The Gardner Interview

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:10, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

hmm

perhaps a revisit and a revert to your edit in 2016 ? [2] JarrahTree 02:53, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Imko

and perhaps a suggestion to think twice before you revert the text of others (User Jwfvmil 8-11-2018) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwfvmil (talk • contribs) 08:52, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

I have exactly told you why I did the revert. See your own talkpage. The Banner talk 09:17, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Adam Cooley

FYi, the article Adam Cooley is at AfD.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:17, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

My knowledge about him is absolutely zero. The Banner talk 10:22, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Suicide bag

He gives as reason on another article "committed: suicide is not a crime, so you don't commit it". I tend to agree. I am not averse to his wording. Ratel (talk) 22:04, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Hmmm, it is a way of putting it that sounds like an euphemism to me. The Banner talk 22:14, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Ratel, see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 140#Stigmatizing language regarding suicide. Also see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Archive 197#Use of "died by suicide" at the David Reimer article. Consensus is currently against favoring "died by suicide" over "committed suicide." Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 02:01, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Flyer22 Reborn, meh, I don't care either way. Ratel (talk) 02:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Reinstating vandalism?

Did you really mean to make this edit reinstating vandalism? Canterbury Tail talk 22:40, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that was accidental as I tried to revert the edit of 193.etc. The Banner talk 22:56, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

That's what I figured. Just looked odd due to the time in between, however I know often the Watchlist doesn't always show the latest version and sometimes can give you a version from 30 minutes ago. No harm. Canterbury Tail talk 23:03, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Was this a mistake?

Was this a mistake? No worries, I've done it myself a couple of times, but would you mind re-reverting? Unless of course I'm wrong, and 'skrt' has some sort of meaning that I'm unaware of. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 17:19, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Hmmm, what is going on? This is the second time in two days that I revert an edit that was already reverted. I will correct it. The Banner talk 18:14, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, The Banner. 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)

•  Done The Banner talk 10:38, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 December 2018

• From the editor: Time for a truce

• Op-ed: Looking back, looking forward: A beginner's experience on Wikipedia

• Special report: The Christmas wishlist

• Opinion: The blogosphere migrates to Galaxy WMF

• News and notes: Reviewer of the year, WikiCup winner, and the 2019 Wikimedia Summit

• Reflections: Wikipedia, history, and the 100th anniversary of Armistice Day

• In the media: Court-ordered article redaction, paid editing, and rock stars

• Discussion report: Farewell, Mediation Committee

• Arbitration report: A long break ends

• Traffic report: Queen reigns for four weeks straight

• Gallery: Intersections

• Recent research: Why do the most active Wikipedians burn out?; only 4% of students vandalize

• Essay: No one cares about your garage band

• Humour: The dark side of our favorite root vegetable

• From the archives: Ars longa, vita brevis

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:47, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

The Seagull (upcoming film) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Seagull (upcoming film). Since you had some involvement with the The Seagull (upcoming film) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 16:45, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Milos2121

December 5th. Hello. I have noticed that your reverted the changes in Wiki page about the commercial software available. You have stated that you removed the program without an article. Can you explain me what that exactly means? The commercial code I have added is well-known although it does not posses Wiki page. But it has been mentioned in Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Characteristic_mode_analysis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual-band_blade_antenna The EM software market is small and specialized. In recent years, the students have started using it massively and thus the interest in having a list in Wiki. Can you assist here? Milos2121 (talk) 10:06, 5 December 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milos2121 (talk • contribs) 10:02, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

I have been reading the history and realized that you only recognize EM codes having its own page. The CST discussion has revealed that. So, I should read first, post later. Anyway, I suggest adding the two references to the two most used lists available (Clemson and Microwave Journal). To the best of my knowledge, those are the two most comprehensive lists available. Milos2121 (talk) 10:13, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Last edit, I promise. I am not sure who is allowed to add references, but I have generated a couple of them. http://www.microwavejournal.com/articles/29299-electromagnetic-analysis https://cecas.clemson.edu/cvel/modeling/EMAG/csoft.html

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268422506_Simulation_comparison_between_HFSS_CST_and_WIPL-D_for_design_of_dipole_horn_and_parabolic_reflector_antenna (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Fahad_Shamshad/publication/268422506_Simulation_comparison_between_HFSS_CST_and_WIPL-D_for_design_of_dipole_horn_and_parabolic_reflector_antenna/links/551866450cf2d70ee27b3b38/Simulation-comparison-between-HFSS-CST-and-WIPL-D-for-design-of-dipole-horn-and-parabolic-reflector-antenna.pdf)

https://www.armms.org/media/uploads/1335467278.pdf Thanks Milos2121 (talk) 10:27, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Very simple: without an own Wikipedia article, the program is not regarded to be notable enough to be on the list. Write an article about the program first. The Banner talk 10:36, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Understood and thanks for a rapid reply. I hope the references will be of use. Milos2121 (talk) 10:40, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Involuntary euthanasia

There are a lot of factual errors on the involuntary euthanasia page which I attempted to amend. You have deliberately decided to uphold the incorrect information rather than at least provide sources for the claims that I specifically enumerated as having no source. I am prepared to take any legal action against any wikipedia page that is deliberately presented in a factually incorrect state, and or reverted back to a factually incorrect state after correction. If you wish to present the involuntary euthanasia page as is, you will have to provide sources for each and every principle claim within the pages’ contents. WilhelmPoe (talk) 00:52, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

The sources are there, later in the paragraph. And read Wikipedia:No legal threats. The Banner talk 09:25, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 31

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 31, October – Novemeber 2018

• OAWiki
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

If you want to be taken seriously...

...don't put text like "it was feared that the ship would floundered" into articles. Jasidaoui (talk) 18:40, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

And read WP:NOTVAND. Are you being deliberately disruptive with that ridiculous report, or simply incompetent? Jasidaoui (talk) 18:43, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

I take you serious enough to have request a block for you due to vandalism, disruptive editing and "not having a clue". The Banner talk 18:45, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Have you read WP:NOTVAND, ever? Jasidaoui (talk) 18:47, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a playground for kids who have no clue what they are doing.. The Banner talk 18:50, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2018

• From the editors: Where to draw the line in reporting?

• Op-ed: Wikipedia not trumped by Trump appointee

• Special report: The Signpost got 380,000+ views in 2018, sounds reasonable enough, right?

• News and notes: Some wishes do come true

• In the media: Political hijinks

• Discussion report: A new record low for RfA

• WikiProject report: Articlegenesis

• Arbitration report: Year ends with one active case

• Traffic report: Queen dethroned by U.S. presidents

• Gallery: Sun and Moon, water and stone

• Blog: News from the WMF

• Humour: I believe in Bigfoot

• Essay: Requests for medication

• From the archives: Compromised admin accounts – again

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:36, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Your AIV report

Hello, I saw your report on AIV about Jasidaoui. I don't see any edits from Jasidaoui that I would classify as vandalism. That said, I see that you too do seem to be having some sort of disagreement. Would you please elaborate on what this is about? ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 18:50, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Editwarring to remove a valid red link to Burren National Park is in my opinion vandalism. At least, it shows that he is disruptive and does not have a clue. The Banner talk 18:56, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

There is a separate page to report edit warring. If anything, that is where you should report it. However, I would reccomend both of you try having a talk page discussion about the redlinks and bold text issues instead of reverting eachother back and forth. That's what the talk page is there for. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 19:01, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Clearly, User:The Banner has not ever read WP:NOTVAND. Edits you don't like or disagree with are not vandalism, unless they are a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of the encyclopaedia. I'd say that replacing "the ship would founder" with "the ship would floundered"[3] would certainly be vandalism if deliberate, but I think you did that just out of incompetence. Perhaps you could clarify? Jasidaoui (talk) 19:04, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

38 edits in 8 days and you are already waving massively with policies and guidelines. Are you serious? The Banner talk 19:27, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

And blanking your userpage from all warning is also not a good sign. The Banner talk 19:35, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

I see you've been blocked nine times in your ~10 years of editing, for edit warring, harassment, frivolous noticeboard threads and disruptive editing.[4] Interesting! Jasidaoui (talk) 19:48, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

For a new user you know your way around pretty well. I guess you are not so new as you pretend to be. The Banner talk 20:06, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Instead of arguing about eachother and who did what bad behavior, why not try discussing content? ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 20:12, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Jasidaoui is  Confirmed to BKFIP and blocked. Happy New Year!
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:03, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much. And happy New Year to you and your loved ones too. The Banner talk 20:19, 30 December 2018 (UTC)