User talk:thetree284/Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

RFA redirects

Hi! I think the targets are good if they are into that section (Wikipedia:Requests for permissions#Administrator) as it also links the current request for adminships. Many people link it to give others idea about RFA, and it is already linked to many talkpages. Changing it is unnecessary imo.-- BRP^ever 01:49, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I got it right now, when I was to change the redirect of the section about request for adminship, I saw you reverted my edit and now I got it how to do it. Thanks. thetree284 (talk) 01:52, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:OMNOMNO2

That user is blocked for abusing multiple accounts, but how do you know they're a sockpuppet of User:TaiUhBye? Tuscan Ant (talk) 23:51, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Because I look OMNOMNO2's edits and I saw he was blocked by using abusing multiple accounts with TaiUhBye. Thanks, thetree284 (talk) 23:53, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how you can tell that. Tuscan Ant (talk) 23:56, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As the blocking admin: User:OMNOMNO2 is clearly socking with User:OMNOMNO3_SHORT_STORIES. I don't know how you connected OMNOMNO2 with TaiUhBy since those blocks were made months apart. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 23:59, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Because I met him before and he edits at his house and I have NO relation with TaiUhBye and OMNOMNO2. So therefore, OMNOMNO2 is a sockpuppet of TaiUhBye, not OMNOMO3 or OMNOMNO3 SHORT STORIES. Thanks, thetree284 (talk) 23:59, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's not convincing. Your reasoning is equivalent to an unblock request that states "That wasn't me, but my friend who did it on my computer". Unless you have any proof, even just a behavioural one, you shouldn't be tagging user pages with the sockpuppet template. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 00:04, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks Fehufanga, I didn’t realize my comment was an unblock request. thetree284 (talk) 00:09, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't, but your reasoning that the two accounts are related is not convincing. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 00:09, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh right, I thought the two accounts are related to each other but you said that is not convincing. So anyways thanks Fehufanga! Now I gotta edit mistakes, revert vandalism and make new pages! See you soon! thetree284 (talk) 00:14, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quick deletion of thetree284

The page you wrote, thetree284, has been selected for quick deletion. If you think this page should be kept, please add {{wait}} below the line {{QD}} and say why on the talk page. If the page is already gone, but you think this was an error, you can ask for it to be undeleted. You can find more information about the reason here. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 10:42, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But I made the page Thetree284 into my userpage is because I do not want vandals from recreating the page Thetree284 many times. Sorry about that, I will not do this again. Thanks, thetree284 (talk) 16:33, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If it ever happens, you can contact the admins and they will deal with it and block the vandal. Thank you for understanding and happy editing, tree :) Stay safe and happy! ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 17:34, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Inter-namespace redirects

Hello, I noticed you made an inter-namespace redirect at thetree284 to your userspace. Please don't do that as namespace should only hold encyclopedic articles and redirects to such articles, as user pages have little to no use in an encyclopedia in its intended use-case. So in the future, please don't create inter-namespace redirects in mainspace.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:47, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I will not create them in the future. Thanks, thetree284 (talk) 16:29, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]