User talk:Quetstar

You and NEDOCHAN keep being reverted on Lucy Letby without good reason

Hi @Quetstar: have you seen what the user on Lucy Letby has done again? Despite there being no clear consensus and four editors including you, I and @NEDOCHAN: objecting on talk (Talk:Lucy Letby#Lucy Letby Introduction - Suggested edit), Sirfurboy has just reinstated his own version of the lead excluding "serial killer". There is clearly no consensus for his edits (there's actually more editors objecting than supporting) and I think it shouldn't be allowed - but I can't edit the page myself to revert. @NEDOCHAN: and @Quetstar: can something be done to stop this editor just reinstating his edits despite no consensus on talk? As you say NEDOCHAN, the talk page discussion is definitely not an example of proper consensus. 109.144.211.224 (talk) 22:49, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Edits reverted. Quetstar (talk) 23:36, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Quetstar, as you have just started editing this page, you won't be aware of the sockpuppet, User:BarehamOliver and the recent history of User:MeltingDistrict, likely the same sockpuppet or else a meat puppet of the same person. As MeltingDistrict, the editor revealed themself to have a deep personal grudge against Richard Gill, and also demonstrated they were following his Twitter feed [1]. After being banned for socking in an RfC to manipulate the outcome (including IP socking), they returned as an IP to continue their vendetta against Gill. Their IP was banned Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1141#Ban Evasion - Trolling IP, but it was always clear they had access to some other IPs, and as they are following me around, and this page has a connection with Gill, the sockpuppet's presence is expected.

This message on your talk page is the classic MO, therefore, of MeltingDistrict, who has an indefinite ban from Wikipedia. I am sure you don't wish to be manipulated by a sockpuppet. Request that you restore the wording we had revised in talk and that no registered user had raised an actual objection to. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:43, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! 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) 00:26, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Standard notification: Syrian Civil War

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 the Syrian Civil War and ISIL. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. 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.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

As a note, per these community-authorized general sanctions, there is a one-revert rule in place for all articles related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, broadly construed. This means that an editor in this area may make no more than one revert per article per 24 hour period, unless an obvious exception applies. Please let me know if you have any questions about this. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 21:34, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

January 2025

Hello, I'm Freedoxm. I noticed that you recently removed content from Syria without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 23:00, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

@Quetstar: I have pinged you on Syria's talk page so that people can decide on using it. Ik its controversial that "Suriyā" is used but as always you can check the arabic version of the article, and you will see it has usage of "Suriyā". Thanks. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 00:34, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Syria discussion

Please respond regarding your edits at Talk:Syria. Thank you. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 00:51, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

@Freedoxm I have responded. Thanks. Quetstar (talk) 00:54, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

no problem. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 00:56, 12 January 2025 (UTC)