Tinynanorobots
Heraldry and Vexillology project
editGreetings! I have requested commentary from members of the heraldry and vexillology project at WT:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology#Current direction of the HV project. Please comment there. Thank you! Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 18:23, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Tinynanorobots. Despite what Volunteer Marek says in his last edit summary, deleting large chunks of text without an explanation, especially (but not only) when it includes citations, is not okay here. would you please explain any deletion in your edit summary? Someone has worked to create each section. If it is worthless, then please say why that is in your edit summary. If it has some value but does not belong here, then please move it to another article or else create a new one to put it into. Moonraker (talk) 02:46, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
- Actually deleting large chunk of unsourced text is just fine, and in fact it's good practice (it's pretty much what real life "editors" mostly do). When the text is sourced then yes, before deleting explanation should be provided. But in this case, at least for some of the deletions it looked to me like it was provided, on talk. Volunteer Marek 18:40, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Featuring your work on Wikipedia's front page: DYKs
edit| Thank you for your recent articles, including Ostsiedlung in Pomerania, which I read with interest. When you create an extensive and well referenced article, you may want to have it featured on Wikipedia's main page in the Did You Know section. Articles included there will be read by thousands of our viewers. To do so, add your article to the list at T:TDYK. Let me know if you need help, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:26, 6 October 2013 (UTC) |
WikiProject assessment tags for talk pages
edit| Thank you for your recent articles, including Ostsiedlung in Pomerania, which I read with interest. When you create a new article, can you add the WikiProject assessment templates to the talk of that article? See the talk page of the article I mentioned for an example of what I mean. Usually it is very simple, you just add something like {{WikiProject Keyword}} to the article's talk, with keyword replaced by the associated WikiProject (ex. if it's a biography article, you would use WikiProject Biography; if it's a United States article, you would use WikiProject United States, and so on). You do not have to rate the article if you do not want to, others will do it eventually. Those templates are very useful, as they bring the articles to a WikiProject attention, and allow them to start tracking the articles through Wikipedia:Article alerts and other tools. This can help you too, as the WikiProject members will often defend your work from deletion and try to improve it further. Feel free to ask me any questions if you'd like more information. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:26, 6 October 2013 (UTC) |
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
edit
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 15
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Yasuke, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bushi. 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) 19:59, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
About Yasuke
edit94-kun here and I noticed that you're trying your best to make sure that Yasuke is simply a retainer and not a samurai. 94-kun (talk) 22:23, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- That is not what I am doing and not how I see things. I don’t know why you are getting at. I am trying my best to make sure that poor sources aren’t used and that problematic sources aren’t depicted as flawless. If Yasuke was a retainer, it still wouldn’t be simple. Tinynanorobots (talk) 15:11, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- You have a really good point. I'm sorry for my own confusion. 94-kun (talk) 05:51, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Unaccounted removals of sources
editPlease don't remove sources from Yasuke after multiple editors have objected. Most importantly, if you do remove sources or content, please give a brief explanation in the edit summary. Unexplained removal of sources against consensus [1] [2] can be seen as disruptive. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 23:44, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
- You know why those sources were removed. Tinynanorobots (talk) 12:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
- I understand your reason for removing them (though I don't agree with it). However, I don't understand why you didn't describe what you were doing in the edit summaries. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 13:07, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
- I was distracted when making the edits and I forgot. Tinynanorobots (talk) 13:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- I understand your reason for removing them (though I don't agree with it). However, I don't understand why you didn't describe what you were doing in the edit summaries. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 13:07, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
AGF
editI think you really need to read wp:agf and wp:npa. Slatersteven (talk) 12:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
- Apologies and thanks for point it out. I have changed what I believe to be the problem text. Again apologies. Tinynanorobots (talk) 12:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
September 2024
editYou are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Ongoing problems surrounding Yasuke and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.
Thanks, Yvan Part (talk) 11:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
Arbitration case opened
editYou were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Backlash to diversity and inclusion. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Backlash to diversity and inclusion/Evidence. Please add your evidence by October 10, 2024, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Backlash to diversity and inclusion/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction. For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 12:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
An arbitration case Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Yasuke (formerly titled Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Backlash to diversity and inclusion) has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
- Yasuke is designated as a contentious topic. Starting in 2026 and checked yearly afterwards, this designation expires on 1 January if no sanctions have been logged in the preceding 2 years.
- The article Yasuke is subject to a 1RR restriction for a period of one year.
- Eirikr is topic banned from Yasuke, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- Symphony Regalia is topic banned from Yasuke, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- J2UDY7r00CRjH is topic banned from Yasuke, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- Yvan Part is topic banned from Yasuke, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- Gitz6666 is warned that disruptive behavior will lead to increasing sanctions if they continue.
- Elinruby is subject to a one-way interaction ban with Gitz6666, subject to the usual exceptions. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust (talk) 23:06, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
Samurai Reverts
editHi Tinynanorobots! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Samurai several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.
All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Samurai, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Ethiopian Epic (talk) 23:48, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Tinynanorobots Hi what part of my edit did you have an issue with? I see that you edit warred to say it wasn't explained but I did explain it so that's kind of confusing. Ethiopian Epic (talk) 05:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
- Why don't you post on the Talk:Samurai? Your first edit on Samurai only had the edit summary:
Some improvements
which isn't very explanatory, but also misleading because it mainly reverted the lead to what it was a few months ago. So, I guess what I want to know is: What was wrong with how the article was? - Also, you should know that an admin recently posted on your talk page. Tinynanorobots (talk) 16:47, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
- Why did you dodge the question? What part of my edit did you have an issue with? "What was wrong with how the article was?" is vague and unhelpful. Ethiopian Epic (talk) 10:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- I am not dodging the question. The issue with your edit is that it reverted edits made by myself and @太西 and possibly others, without explaining what was wrong with those edits. I want to know why you reverted those edits. I asked you to explain that, and you have been dodging the questions. Tinynanorobots (talk) 13:37, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- You are dodging the question. "What was wrong with how the article was?" isn't actionable for me because it doesn't help me understand which part of the edit you are objecting to because I don't think it's all of it. I was removing unsourced material as I earlier explained. It seems like you don't have an issue with the edits but possibly have an issue that I made the edits? I just want to improve the article so hopefully I can understand your position better. Ethiopian Epic (talk) 23:24, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- I am not dodging the question. The issue with your edit is that it reverted edits made by myself and @太西 and possibly others, without explaining what was wrong with those edits. I want to know why you reverted those edits. I asked you to explain that, and you have been dodging the questions. Tinynanorobots (talk) 13:37, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- Why did you dodge the question? What part of my edit did you have an issue with? "What was wrong with how the article was?" is vague and unhelpful. Ethiopian Epic (talk) 10:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- Why don't you post on the Talk:Samurai? Your first edit on Samurai only had the edit summary:
- Tinynanorobots, it looks like you're not responding to the wave of bullying from User:Ethiopian Epic while you wait for an administrator to put a stop to it. I recommend you keep doing that for now. I'm extremely disappointed that EE, now that they know consensus at Samurai is against them, can't stop antagonizing you here and elsewhere and I'm similarly unimpressed that no administrator has done anything about the rampage they've been on for the last few hours. City of Silver 07:20, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
editHello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:27, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Noticeboard
editThere is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Ethiopian Epic (talk) 01:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
edit
You have recently edited a page related to Yasuke, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
Noticeboard
editThere is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Ethiopian Epic (talk) 01:58, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Notice of Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard discussion
editHello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. Thank you. EEpic (talk) 18:40, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
Your thread has been archived
editHello Tinynanorobots! The thread you created at the Teahouse, You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please .
See also the help page about the archival process.
The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing |