User talk:48Pills

Welcome!

Hello, 48Pills, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! RFD (talk) 13:07, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Copy and pasting

We run "copy and paste" detection software on new edits. One of your edits appear to be infringing on someone else's copyright. See also Wikipedia:Copy-paste. We at Wikipedia usually require paraphrasing. If you own the copyright to this material please follow the directions at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials to grant license. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:15, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/check-if-you-have-coronavirus-symptoms/

April 2020

Hi 48Pills! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia — it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if the edit concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 09:15, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

WP:ONUS and reinstating challenged material

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please don't reinsert material that has been challenged (by reversion or otherwise). Our policy WP:ONUS ("The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content.") and the guideline Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle give more details. Thanks. --Neutrality^talk 23:47, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

And, separately, this edit summary of yours from a few days ago does not comport with our policy on civility. Neutrality^talk 23:47, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

FUCK OFF, you make me sick
Our policy, our way... we are the collective, you will be assimilated, resistance is futi.....

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Neutrality^talk 23:57, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

CUNT

June 2020

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  v/r - TP 00:11, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Xiaomi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:24, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

DS Alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

--Jorm (talk) 21:20, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

"you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor"... well, that was some discussion. 48Pills (talk) 19:24, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

September 2020

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Doug Weller talk 15:34, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Doug Weller, show any alleged personal attack or harassment that was not preceded by similar personal attack or harassment upon my person. We both know you had no reason for this block other than I dared disagree with the views of your clique. 48Pills (talk) 19:22, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

But this isn't your first time. You were blocked before and [[User:Neutrality],] warned you about an edit summary. Crying "but they did it" won't wash. Doug Weller talk 19:32, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

You're saying an editor deserves to be blocked, irrespective of grounds, simply because the same thing has happened before, while dismissing any preceding personal attack or harassment upon that editor as "Crying"? Your implementation of the rules would then permit any editor to personally attack or harass any other, and if they were to as much as ask them to stop, it could result in a block, just because "this wasn't their first time". 48Pills (talk) 02:50, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Deprodding of Rotoworld

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Rotoworld, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, proposed deletion is disallowed on articles that have previously been de-prodded, even by the page's creator, or which have previously been listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{proposed deletion}} template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! —KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:32, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:03, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Witenagemot, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Germanic.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

SteamPunk Page Vandal

The vandalism you reverted and then reverted again is a long standing personal vendetta. There's more info on the SteamPunk talk page. The same user is just repeatedly making a personal attack on me. However, you must have only skimmed because it is more strongly supported by reputable journal references than the rest of the page combined. If you're interested in the main physicist mentioned Nicole Halpern here's a recent podcast by her: https://anchor.fm/random-walks/episodes/Revolutionising-the-frontiers-and-heralding-in-the-era-of-Quantum-Steampunk-with-Nicole-Yunger-Halpern-Harvard-eoga8t and here's the official opening of her lab: https://quantumsteampunk.umiacs.io/ Thanks! Nemesis75 (talk) 18:16, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

"Imaginary" links?

What do you mean here by "an imaginary link"? Do you mean the very real way in which one can click on, say, "DennisLyman" in the list of refs and be taken to the entry in the bibliography below? It's a very useful feature that makes it easier for readers and editors to check references. You may want to look at Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors. My edits removed the article from that category. DuncanHill (talk) 23:56, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

I find it interesting, in an amusing way, how the completely irrelevant was able to detract your attention from the slightly more significant. Anyway, if you are not "entirely satisfied" or my edits "do not meet with your approval" then you too are quite welcome to fuck off. 48Pills (talk) 00:47, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Instructions

Hey. Long story short: ChartData Twitter is completely unreliable because it is an unverified account. I have exhausted the list of Twitter sources, but have been informed there is also a website that is unreliable, so that’s what I'm working on currently.

Long story long: If you take a look here, it lists every single page on Wikipedia that has the words "chartdata" in a source. I previously used the keywords "twitter.com/ChartData" (their Twitter account), but have exhausted that list and since been informed that ChartData has a website that is also unreliable, so that’s what we'll work from.

List of instructions:

• Find a page on the list I have provided above (here it is again: All pages with source code containing "chartdata")
• Find the ChartData source
  • In the link above, it shows the text surrounding the source, so you could scan the article manually and look for said text
  • You can also go to the "References" section of the page and find the source there
  • You can also paste the entire page into Google Docs or any other application that lets you search for specific words and then proceed to search for the source that way (please note that, in order for the page to be affected, you need to remove the source on Wikipedia, not on the application. It seems like a crazy thing to mention but you’ll be surprised how much it happens)
• Remove the source, making sure to remove the text that is being sourced by said source. You can find examples of this here, here and here
• Save the edit with an edit summary of "Unreliable source per WP:CHART#Websites to avoid"
• Rinse and repeat

If you have any questions about the process/any questions when you’re working through the list, do not hesitate to ask. If you are questioning what text/source to remove, ping me in this thread and I’ll do it. If you’re not sure, don’t remove it, as you could be removing properly sourced info.

Once the list is exhausted, I have many other lists to work through, so if you could help with those as well, that would be awesome. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 22:54, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Edit summary

"mariah-charts.com is a fan site and uses indeterminate methodology (per WP:CHARTS#Websites to avoid)"

Thank You

Hi! I saw your message on FredModulars' talk page and I just want to say thank you for your consideration and willingness to help out! That does mean a lot! Jack Reynolds (talk to me!) (email me!!) 21:24, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

JackReynoldsADogOwner No worries. 48Pills (talk) 22:09, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Khartoum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nubian.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Warning

Your aggressive response here to Hipal's simple reminder to use edit summaries is completely inappropriate. WP:Civility is policy. If you are that rude again, you will be sanctioned. Another point: please start using edit summaries. They are useful for other people. And another: there is no need whatever to copypaste another user's whole post to you at their page. It merely bloats up the page. Bishonen | tålk 19:56, 16 June 2021 (UTC).

Had you bothered to look at my contributions you'd see I leave plenty of Edit Summaries. And there is every need to copypaste another user's whole post back to their page. They were given due warning that it was unwanted, and if it should bloat anyone's page, it should be theirs and not mine. Anyway, your loss 48Pills (talk) 06:13, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Deliberately bloating up other people's pages after being warned is a disruptive practice, and you'll be in deep trouble if you persist in it. I can't find where you asked Hipal to stay off your page; could you provide a diff? Or a date, if you have trouble with diffs. BTW, boasting about your crosswiki incivility on my page[1] just brings you closer to a block. You hardly ever use edit summaries, in fact. Merely leaving the non-informational automatically generated edsum in place doesn't count. You're supposed to say what your edit is about, or what it's intended to achieve or fix. Please start. Bishonen | tålk 08:54, 24 June 2021 (UTC).

On here, you may wallow in your own self-importance and this "project" will continue to be the worse for it. In the real world, nothing you say really matters, least of all to those you patronise. 48Pills (talk) 02:20, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

May 2022

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Robb Elementary School shooting. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

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 and 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. Taxin609 (Talk To Me) 00:57, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

I totally agree. This is an issue best resolved on the Talk Page. 48Pills (talk) 01:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

I just want to follow up on this. I've checked your contributions, and you've blown way past the WP:3RR limit at Robb Elementary School shooting. I count at least 7 reverts in the last two and a half hours. I strongly recommend that you do not make any more reverts on this page. Sideswipe9th (talk) 02:38, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Oh and, I agree with the removals by the way. I just don't want to see an editor get blocked over removing transphobic content. Sideswipe9th (talk) 02:52, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to User talk:Sideswipe9th does not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits a summary may be quite brief.

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! — Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Join WP:FINANCE! 17:10, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@ Ixtal Apologies. 48Pills (talk) 17:16, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Just a follow up recommendation for this one from Ixtal. You may want to give the new reply tool a try some time. I believe it's now enabled for all editors by default, and adds a reply button beside each complete signature. Helpfully it always appends your signature to your reply, and also ensures that a basic edit summary is included for any reply you make! Sideswipe9th (talk) 02:01, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

@Sideswipe9th Great, thanks. 👍 48Pills (talk) 02:41, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

––FormalDude talk 07:31, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

@FormalDude I live in the UK, here we have nowhere near the same issues with gun control. My focus is on any of the following: armed conflict, genocide, racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, the persecution of minorities, ethnic cleansing and all forms of injustice. 48Pills (talk) 08:29, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

It's important to remember that discretionary sanctions are not based on the geographic location of the editor, they're based on article content. You're receiving this notice because you've recently been editing Robb Elementary School shooting, which has content touching on both gun control, and post-1992 American Politics. I'd have added gender and sexuality as well, but after the transgender conspiracy section of the article was subject to a major trim, there doesn't appear to be consensus for WP:GENSEX discretionary sanctions to apply.

While I've not looked at all your diffs to see if you've edited any of the gun control content or post-1992 American politics content, because you've been editing the article for several days now it's still appropriate to give you that notice. Sideswipe9th (talk) 15:43, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

@FormalDude @Sideswipe9th Can either of you be more specific as what I have done that would warrant the warning of possible sanctions? 48Pills (talk) 00:23, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

I thought I had? I'll rephrase though in case this helps with clarity.

When you make any edit to an article that is subject to one or more discretionary sanctions such as Robb Elementary School shooting, or the many biographical articles of living persons that are in your recent edit history, you can be notified by any editor who is either also editing or watching that article about the presence of the sanctions that apply to the article. Such a notification is considered a neutral act, it doesn't imply that you've done or will do anything wrong. It's simply to inform you about the stricter conduct rules that apply to that article, and others in the same topic area. For most editors, the notice is a mere formality, and nothing else will come of it. It's only for editors who are being in one or more ways disruptive that it will ever become something more. Sideswipe9th (talk) 00:35, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

@Sideswipe9th Fully understood. 👍 48Pills (talk) 00:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

June 2022

Your edit to European Conference on Digital Libraries has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. – Pbrks ^(t • c) 05:05, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

July 2022

Hello, I'm MB. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Karina Lombard., but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. See WP:BIRTHDATE, you even ignored a comment in the article saying that a birthdate must be cited. MB 00:47, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Your edits on Karina Lombard also added a number of unsourced, personal details, of the exact content and phrasing we've seen the BLP subject themselves add, repeatedly, which is why that individual (with their multiple accounts) is blocked from editing Wikipedia. Do you have any connection with the BLP subject that you would like to disclose? Please read the WP:COI policies if you have not yet been informed of them. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 20:14, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Your comments here:[2] and your repetitive, disruptive, unsourced or poorly-sourced edits at Karina Lombard are pretty much identical to blocked sockdrawer Tzarinak (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) et al. Based on your editing pattern, voice and m.o., the sock policy applies whether you are a sockpuppet or meatpuppet. This combined with your refusal to respond to the question of COI means I am removing your ability to further disrupt at that page. If you continue to disrupt and edit war elsewhere on the 'pedia, your editing privileges as a whole will be removed as well. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 20:01, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain pages (Karina Lombard) for Disruptive editing, edit warring to repeatedly add unsourced or poorly sourced promotional or inaccurate BLP content.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 20:05, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

I came to this decision after other editors in good standing weighed in on your history of disruption at my talk page. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 20:44, 20 July 2022 (UTC)