User talk:Greedo8/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Greedo8. 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.

Archive 1

Username

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Greedo8", may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because your name is deemed offensive by some editors. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username, or you may simply create a new account for editing. I'm here to ask you to consider changing your user name. "Greedo" is close to "guido". Thank you.Hoops gza (talk) 18:17, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

"Guido is a given name Latinised from the Old High German name Wido." "Guido" does not violate the username policy, and a username that merely has a phonetic similarity does not violate it either. I am sorry if you are offended, but I will not change my username. You may have better luck with your templates on the Greedo talk page. Greedo8 (talk) 18:46, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Vandalism?

Greedo8, why did you remove my edit on Hillsboro, Oregon page?

The nickname is definitely NOT 'The Hub City', and is 'Hillsburrito'. Do you live there? In fact, if you Google 'Hillsburrito', everything references Hillsboro, Oregon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.144.156.122 (talk) 20:13, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, 198.144.156.122. Sorry if you're upset. Being that Hillsboro, Oregon is today's featured article, there have been many attempts at vandalism. If you have a credible source for the "Hillsburrito" nickname, please cite it when you edit the article so that there will be no confusion. Greedo8 (talk) 20:20, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Not to mention, you removed my edit on the PaRappa the Rapper wiki. There was a sentence that had incorrectly quoted Dred Foxx as confirming the game being made, even though no such confirmation ever accorded. If you paid attention to the facebook fan page, this rumor was addressed and confirmed that he never claimed it was being made. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.69.130 (talk) 02:18, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi there 24.7.69.130, I'm assuming you're referring to this edit [1], in which you removed a large amount of content that was sourced correctly. Any unexplained content removal has a high chance of being viewed as vandalism and reverted. Next time you remove content, please be sure to give a reason in the edit summary. Thanks! Greedo8 (talk) 21:24, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Re: Thylacine.

How can I cite myself? I was adding accurate, pertinent info. into the BENJAMIN and SEARCHES section. Plz. advise. Thank you. Tom mendelson — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.229.110.100 (talk) 06:51, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi there Tom, thanks for your message. There's a few policies on citing sources that you should take a look at: WP:NOR, WP:VER, WP:SOURCE. Usually citing yourself as a source isn't acceptable, it's better to find a reliable 3rd party source containing the information. Let me know if you have any more questions after reading those, and I'll do my best to help. Thanks! Greedo 8 20:48, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Question

Are you Danish? Jonas Vinther (talk) 14:00, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

I thought you were done with Wikipedia? Greedo 8 21:08, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

A friend of mine convinced me otherwise Jonas Vinther (talk) 14:00, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm glad. No, I'm not Danish. Greedo 8 15:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Okay. :) Jonas Vinther (talk) 21:50, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

IP I blocked

He violated 3RR, which makes it academic that he backed off after being warned. Daniel Case (talk) 19:09, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Works for me. Thanks! Greedo 8 19:15, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

How to cite changes

Good morning, you recently undid several of my changes to disambiguation pages. Can you show me how to cite these changes so they won't be undone? Thanks (pages: CBI, XPN, TRW, TUC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rchoate (talk • contribs) 14:06, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi there Rchoate, for information on citing sources I recommend you take a look at WP:Cite and Help:Referencing for beginners. The links you were adding didn't appear to be related to the disambiguation pages, adding sources would definitely fix this. You also might want to take a look at WP:Disambiguation. If you still have questions after you've read those, feel free to leave me another message. Thanks! Greedo 8 15:43, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

iron curtain

Please specify your objection to the source, with regard to the material being cited, on the article talk page. Marxists.org is one of the largest online collections of documentation from the Marxist tradition and I've never heard of them falsifying a document. 66.87.119.109 (talk) 18:35, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Do not revert per BLP

As per the multiple reliable sources discussing the issue, the allegations made against Zoe Quinn and Nathan Grayson were false. Here's just one for starters — the burden is on you to demonstrate that the mainstream viewpoint of reliable sources is otherwise, given the longstanding nature of the language and its impeccable sourcing. Making unsourced claims that the allegations were not false is a violation of the Biographies of Living Persons policy. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 20:46, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

"General Sanctions" is quite interesting, thanks for letting me know about it. However, my edit is not about Gamergate, my edit is about the claim that something was false without any clear source. As best I can tell from reading the sources is that there is no proof either way regarding the accusations. It is not a violation of WP:BLP: I am not saying the allegations were true, I am not saying the allegations were false, I am simply trying to say there were allegations. I don't see a reason to state they are false, and allegation is not true until proved so. Claiming that the allegations are false seems to me like a violation of WP:Due and WP:NPOV. Greedo 8 21:15, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

If possible let's have further discussion on the article talk page, where it belongs. Greedo 8 21:17, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Gamergate general sanctions notice

Please read this notification carefully:
A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Gamergate controversy.
The details of these sanctions are described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 20:47, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Just to be clear, you are now blocked indefinitely for your BLP violations. It will be logged as a Gamergate ban. Risker (talk) 04:02, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

@Risker: I apologize for the delay: I was distracted with real life shortly before the block, and today is my first day back. As such, I was not able to read the now-suppressed discussions, nor participate in them. I am unsure how I violated BLP, although I assume it is related to the previously mentioned discussions. Could you please clarify the specific reason for my block? Thanks! Greedo 8 20:05, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello Greedo8; apologies for the delay in responding. Your block is an arbitration enforcement block and it further involves information that has been suppressed from Wikipedia. Because of this, any appeal is pretty much going to have to be made to the Arbitration Committee directly and by email at arbcom-appeals-en

lists.wikimedia.org. Risker (talk) 02:03, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

I will look into the ArbCom appeals process and hopefully get this cleared up. Thanks, Risker. Greedo 8 00:28, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

BASC appeal granted

I've emailed you but wish to add it here. Your appeal has been granted. Welcome back to editing. Dougweller (talk) 18:30, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Greedo 8 16:27, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 17:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

3 reverts?

Hi, I did not even make 3 reverts on Lion, as far as I see. If anything, the user who reverted edits of mine on that page makes more edits on that page than I do, but anyways, that was good advice, thank you Leo1pard (talk) 11:54, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

@Leo1pard I am not accusing you of edit-warring, I used this notification to present other options before things get out of hand. Being on either side of repeated reverts can cause frustration and rapidly lead to a problem. Greedo 8 14:21, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

I see. Thanks anyway. Leo1pard (talk) 14:31, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Greedo8. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)