User talk:A09

Welcome

Hello! I noticed that you may have come here from another Wikipedia, so you know a little about how things work here. I hope you like it here and decide to stay! Here are some links to help you adjust:

There is a lot to do here. Most of it is writing articles that do not exist yet, which you can do by translating from other Wikipedias, but have a look around and see what you want to do. Thanks for joining us! If you need any help, be sure to visit Simple Talk or contact an administrator. Happy changing! MathXplore (talk) 09:56, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! A09 (talk) 09:57, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

Hello. This message is being sent to tell you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Request for semi protection of Abdul Adnan". Thank you. --Ferien (talk) 16:20, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing AN discussion

Probably not worth bulking AN over, I agree with you that the WP:VAND page here isn't quite as clear as it could be. I've got the most experience with EN, and they've got a much clearer defined list at what is, and is not vandalism w:WP:VAND. The third item on the What is not vandalism section is "Disruptive editing or stubbornness". I rarely see UPE editors as focused and determined as this group was/is, especially on clearly bad sources. Good reminder that sometimes you use the tools (AN and VIP) available, use warnings immediately (probably wouldn't have helped, but might have stopped them earlier) and trust that admins will see who's acting in bad faith. Ravensfire (talk) 21:11, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think the problem that occured here was that they added these (spam) PR links that fall under non-reliable sources. As RS is a policy, editing against is a breach of community's consensus. Maybe I wasn't clear enough that I didn't take edit war as vandalism. A09 (talk) 21:16, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I was guessing was your point, that the sources were spam. That's a harder call, but the more reputable sections of those sites do have good sources. I find it tough to call adding a link to an article about a person, even a pile of junk paid-for PR release one, to an article about that person when they aren't adding links to that site(s) in other articles. Promotional editing for sure, but harder to call it spam using a pretty strict definition of spam. I'm old school enough that I agree with you personally that all of these promotional articles are just spam and barely worth the time it takes to tag 'em with QD! I mean, the first type of spam listed at WP:SPAM is "advertisements hidden as articles" which is pretty much what we've got here. Is it enough to get the 3RR exemption for spam? If I had clearly called them spam in the edit summary, perhaps, and warned the editor from the start. Dontbescared was arguing otherwise (and I think most other editors would have agreed the sources were spam), but that whole WP:AGF thing I guess, especially since it was just to the one article.

I'll just be glad when that article is deleted! Ravensfire (talk) 21:33, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ravensfire: Finally it was closed as delete. Hope no more spam occurs. A09 (talk) 19:26, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023

Hello, A09. When you revert a user's changes, like you did earlier, don't forget to leave the user a message on their talk page, especially when reverting vandalism or a test edit. You may find Template:User talk page warnings/table useful when doing this, to let them know that the change was considered inappropriate, and to direct them to the sandbox. Thank you. Bobherry Talk My Changes 10:10, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bobherry: well, one was GRP which is especially instructed not to warn. A09 (talk) 10:24, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

dhruv Sharma

give me a little time to give it notoriety— Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.219.223.166 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

¿Question?

Why did you delete the article if you knew that there was a discussion about its permanence on Wikipedia? In addition, you deleted sources. I ask that you restore it again. Your action is arbitrary. https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_deletion/Requests/2024/Dhruv_Sharma

190.219.223.166 (talk) 21:12, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn’t deleted it nor I can restore it as I don’t posses advanced rights to be able to perform such actions. A09 (talk) 21:29, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blank space

If he adds blank space into an article, just leave it. Don't bother playing his game, please. --Ferien (talk) 19:54, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. @Ferien: Could you protect the page? A09 (talk) 19:54, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I just need to delete it first. --Ferien (talk) 19:54, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. A09 (talk) 19:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024

Hello, A09. When you revert a user's changes, like you did earlier, don't forget to leave the user a message on their talk page, especially when reverting vandalism or a test edit. You may find Template:User talk page warnings/table useful when doing this, to let them know that the change was considered inappropriate, and to direct them to the sandbox. Thank you. DIV IN E 19:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DIVINE: When reverting LTAs it is generally advised not to warn them. Especially the one who we're dealing with currently. A09 (talk) 19:57, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I get the idea. I also requested CU, but they are currently blocked. Anyway, it was a friendly reminder. I believe it was a fresh account, so it's unclear whether they are LTA or not. DIV IN E 20:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DIVINE: Oh, if you're talking about Mataders768, then yes, you were correct for remembering me, however I also warned them via the edit summary. IMO a stern warning is not needed if multiple editors had done the same recently with further explanation in the edit summary. I think we can close this now, user has been blocked for removing RfDs. Best regards, A09 (talk) 20:05, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrations

Illustrations from En wiki have always been used here. There is no objection to using them. Please don't remove them on that basis. Re Surprise (emotion). We welcome illustrations which are to the point! Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:52, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Macdonald-ross: I wouldn't call a bad image of a child (also potentially abusive) that was crosswiki spammed on multiple wikis an appropriate image. Commons has images of higher quality so I could try to replace the old image with a more appropriate one. What do you think? Best, A09 (talk) 07:23, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, please go ahead! Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:41, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Read the article, thanks

the article now starts out with 4 correct and updated sentences, in a row. Please consider not mucking that up. 2001:2020:335:955E:C8DB:2248:1C41:1E90 (talk) 20:57, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hot chocolate

Asteralee has given you some Hot chocolate with plump marshmallows and foamy cream! Drink it up and spread this yummy drink by putting {{subst:Hot chocolate}} on someone's talk pageǃ

Aster🪻 ^talk ^edits 14:08, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Asteralee: Thanks! what did I do to deserve this? Best, A09 (talk) 14:27, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By just being a hard working editor ː) Aster🪻 ^talk ^edits 14:28, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! Such messages are way too rare even in broader Wikimedia community. All the best, A09 (talk) 14:52, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]