User talk:Setarip

January 2022

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to List of serial killers by number of victims have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: List of serial killers by number of victims was changed by Setarip (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.863109 on 2022-01-06T19:40:44+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 19:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Daniel Camargo Barbosa. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically

I DID NOT, I ADDED A PHOTOGRAPH OF HIM IN THE 1950'S AND YOU DELETED IT FOR COPYRIGHT FFS THE GUY WHO TOOK IT IS PROBABLY DEAD reverted.

If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Daniel Camargo Barbosa was changed by Setarip (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.857619 on 2022-01-06T19:47:02+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 19:47, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on User:Glaceonstan. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. —C.Fred (talk) 00:49, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

its proved hes a furry Setarip (talk) 00:51, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You shouldn't change their user page one way or the other. —C.Fred (talk) 00:53, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, didn't even notice someone had added misinformation to my page. Thanks for that Glaceonstan (talk) 01:09, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

bruh its proved ur a furry Setarip (talk) 20:46, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Let it go. I'd say unless you've got reliable sources, but the sources would have to link to the Wikipedia account, so frankly, it's in your best interests to just drop the subject. —C.Fred (talk) 23:59, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Most Boring Day in History moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to The Most Boring Day in History. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. JTtheOG (talk) 17:27, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that one or more recent edit(s) you made did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 14:35, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is especially important to use edit summaries when reverting the good-faith contributions of other editors. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:53, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

it isnt good faith he removed the collages by mass Setarip (talk) 13:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They removed the collages en masse because they believe that was an improvement of the articles. It was good-faith, though disruptive. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:20, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, 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 special powers 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 practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

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.

This is why your edits have been removed from the WP:ITN discussion; since you are not extended confirmed, you are not permitted to participate in the topic area. BilledMammal (talk) 11:11, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:The Most Boring Day in History has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:The Most Boring Day in History. Thanks! Newystats (talk) 03:04, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024

Hello, I'm DreamRimmer. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to PewDiePie vs T-Series—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. – DreamRimmer (talk) 13:14, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Most Boring Day in History (March 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AntientNestor was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Fails WP:EFFECT and WP:DEPTH

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:The Most Boring Day in History and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AntientNestor (talk) 15:32, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Setarip! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! AntientNestor (talk) 15:32, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:The Most Boring Day in History

Hello, Setarip. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:The Most Boring Day in History, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:06, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:The Most Boring Day in History

Hello, Setarip. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "The Most Boring Day in History".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:35, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:45, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Attacks on the United States

Hey Setarip! I came across your profile during some of your recent editing in regard to the Syrian conflict. I've been working on a big project over the last few weeks: Attacks on the United States. The aim is to have a list of every time the U.S. (government/military) was attacked.

Well anyway, I wanted to see if you would be interested in helping me put together some of the summaries for the list. I am fairly sure most of the attacks themselves are on the list. But, I'm still working to get the summaries and references put together for each of them. If you are interested or have any questions, feel free to message me back here or on my talk page anytime! If not, I completely understand. Keep up the good work on Wikipedia! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 02:49, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive Reversions

Hello. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent reversion because it did not appear constructive. If you have concerns about the lead in the article Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, please discuss them in the article's talk page first. Firecat93 (talk) 13:15, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the following discussion: Talk:Abdel Fattah el-Sisi#Should we be referring to Sisi as Dictator?

You are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Firecat93 (talk) 13:20, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]