User talk:Galendalia/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Rollback granted

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hi Galendalia. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have temporarily enabled rollback on your account until 2020-05-31. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 19:13, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@L235: - Thanks but the rights were already done earlier by Lourdes (talk · contribs) about an hour ago. But, hey at least I know people are looking at the requests :). Thanks! Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 19:16, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Apologies I didn't see that! We normally have a bot that tells us when these things are done, so I forgot to check in this case. My bad! Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 19:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

No worries man. I didn't see the done on it either lol. It is all good @L235:!

Oh @L235: I also noticed on the user list for the rights, there are "infinitely blocked" users still listed. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 19:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Congratulations

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

CVU Academy Graduate

Congratulations from both myself and all of the instructors at the Counter Vandalism Unit Academy on your successful completion of the Counter Vandalism Unit Academy. You completed your final exam with a score of 94%. Well done! It has been a pleasure working with you this past week or so, and thank you for offering to help out in removing vandalism from the project's articles. If you ever need any advice or assistance in the future, you're always welcome on my talk page. Hope to see you around! --Puddleglum2.0(How's my driving?) 17:15, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wow

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hello, I see you passed the CVUA fast, and wanted to say good job, I am still in the CVUA its taking me forever. Nice going hope to see you fighting vandalism around! The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 16:43, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @The4lines (talk · contribs) Very much appreciated! Stick to it and you will pass! Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 19:43, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Also I see you have the San Diego county flag, are you from there, as I live in San Diego county. The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 19:02, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@The4lines: Yes I do. In OB. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 19:04, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Cool, I live in the suburb of Escondido. The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 19:10, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

The4lines I am sorry Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 19:15, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

What??? The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 19:44, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

The4lines I thought all of Escondido was a 'suburb' :) Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 19:56, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The Sky is Pink

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Resolved

Hey there, I'm an administrator on the English Wikipedia. Look, I know you recently jumped into Guild of Copy Editors and I know you might've gotten burnt, from your perspective, but I want to encourage you to try again. I don't think that your efforts were made in bad faith, but with regard to the article The Sky is Pink, I think there were some hasty changes that should be addressed and I'm hoping you'll let me explain them to you, and I will do my best to not be condescending. I initially raised the matter with Puddleglum and my hope was that since they were your initial greeting contact, that maybe the feedback would have been better received from them, rather than from me, a stranger. I'm happy to explain my notes, but I don't want to burden you with unwanted criticism, so if or when you're ready, please feel free to {{ping}} me or of course you don't have to at all. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:41, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Hi I appreciate your efforts. Puddle had explained them to me but then the individuals within the guild made those statements which made and still make me unwanted. While I will do my best to fight vandalism, they and those individuals involved have a burnt a bridge that may never be repaired. I do appreciate you reaching out though. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 04:46, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

I understand. Sorry it wasn't an inspirational experience. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:49, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: No worries. People were directing me to conflicting pages of what to do so they need to work it out. I’m sure I’ll find another way to help out though what I’m doing is a lot as well lol Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 04:54, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey Galendalia, I'm sorry as well that the GOCE didn't turn out to well for you. I understand your problems with how things have been handled, and I hope that the discussions members are having now will result in a better experience for new members. It's really a shame you were the catalyst and did not feel welcomed, but I hope your example is what prompts us to come up with a better welcoming system. All the best and stay well, --Puddleglum^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 20:01, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Puddleglum2.0: I will come back if Jonesy stops the personal attacks against me and other new users. Even the other new guild editor took his comments personally based on their comments. Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 20:06, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Im new here but to me it seemed like you were a good copy editor. I’m sorry about this turn of events. If you dont want to that’s fine, but could you explain why you left? Stay safe and well, --Total Eclipse 2017 ^{(talk) (Origin of the username)} —Preceding undated comment added 21:18, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Good work

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

You only got here 2 weeks ago and are already a rollbacker and editing like a pro. Not bad :) Hillelfrei^{• talk •} 16:18, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

​Thanks Hillelfrei! Very much appreciated! Galendalia^{CVUChat Me Up} 10:41, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Ping/yo/re is a template, not a link

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Y If you want to mention somebody in a talk page reply, make sure to use the template, which requires curly braces. For example, {{Yo|Adrian}}. —C.Fred (talk) 02:59, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Yeah my phone autocorrects which really annoys me!!!! @C.Fred: ;) Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 03:01, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Your ANEW report

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Y Hello Galendalia, hope you are doing well. First off, I saw your edit warring report that included myself. I replied to your comment there with my rationale for reverting that vandalism-only account. I just wanted to let you know my talk page is open if you have any questions regarding anti-vandalism work, or anything about Wikipedia. I would be happy to help you. Thanks! -- LuK3 (Talk) 00:22, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

You are good. You can delete that. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 00:26, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

BTW @LuK3: I striked through my comment! Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 03:03, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Appreciate the message

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Y Unfortunately, I'm not familiar enough with everything going on to add my voice to the discussion. My apologies for not being able to do more, Spencer^T•C 05:16, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

No worries @Spencer:. Thanks! Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 05:22, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Error on Spoken Wikipedia Invite

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

 Done I wasn't sure where else to put this, but I wanted to let you know that, in your Spoken Wikipedia invite, the hyperlink to the participants list links to the Pronunciation task force list instead of the Spoken Wikipedia participants list. It looked unintentional, but I could be mistaken. —Madqueencabbage (talk) 07:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

@Madqueencabbage: Thank you for pointing that out! It has been fixed. Once the page is refreshed, it should show. I tested yours and when I did the CTRL+F5, the link came up properly. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 07:16, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

US Presidents' Nicknames edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hello Galendalia,

I actually feel that the content I attempted to remove was "less than neutral". The article is a list of nicknames in "common usage at the time they were in office or shortly thereafter". As I mentioned in my edit summary, the fact that several journalists may have used these nicknames isn't what is meant by the phrase "common usage". I have never heard Trump referred to by these nicknames in conversations with live people. I removed them because they obviously do not fit the article's own characterization of itself, and I'm curious as to how that could possibly seem "less than neutral" to you. Please reconsider your decision or redefine the terms of the article.

Thank you

2601:445:37F:8A10:15C2:192E:EF1D:B373 (talk) 20:15, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

I have looked at the edits and the sources and they do indeed meet the criteria for inclusion on the page as they are cited from reliable sources. Just because you have not heard them used, does not give you the right to remove the edits by other users, especially when they have been up there for a couple months. I stand by my decision.

Thanks Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 20:30, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Creaming

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I have started a new section on Talk:creaming about the other use of creaming. If you have any information on it can you add it there? 2601:647:CB03:5930:3904:EF4C:FBD9:5 (talk) 22:29, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Not sure why I this post was put here. Please explain. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 23:20, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

• I thought maybe you knew about this use of "creaming" since you reverted my edit about using shaving or whipped cream as a prank. I thought maybe you knew what this type of creaming was, because I am uncertain what form of cream is used for this prank. 2601:647:CB03:5930:685E:CEF8:9CD9:8344 (talk) 23:35, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

• OK, I pinged you on the talk page. 2601:647:CB03:5930:685E:CEF8:9CD9:8344 (talk) 23:39, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

3O

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

 Courtesy link: [[:Talk:Basilica]] What was the reason you deleted my 3O request? Elizium23 (talk) 07:23, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

I’m typing out what I need to right now so please have some patience @Elizium23: Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 07:24, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hed PE (album)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hello Galendalia, is there any way you could undo your change to my edit on the Hed PE (album) article? I do have an image of the cassette tape with the original tracklisting, including the cut track that I mentioned in my edit, that I can upload. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warheadz666 (talk • contribs) 13:20, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

@Warheadz666: I believe I reverted your change due to the name of the hidden track as there is no source cited about that hidden track. Please remember to sign your posts using ~~~~. Thanks Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 19:34, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Basilica

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

 Deferred to Wikipedia:DNR

The only reason the article read that way at that point in time is because GPinkerton had modified it from its original form. He had split off the Catholic basilica section without consensus and erased them from the main article. I am amazed that you would take his word at face value instead of attempt to resolve the dispute. Elizium23 (talk) 21:43, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

@Gpinkerton: and @Elizium23: - It has nothing to do with taking anyone's word. It is not my job to resolve the dispute, it is my job to offer a 3rd opinion (they are two completely separate items). I read through all of the previous conversations. If you feel I was wrong, please provide me the diffs on those pages in which the short descriptions were changed and I will review it again. I am a neutral party to this and I have read everything and stated certain things should not be listed in the article as there are separate articles for each of the Basilica types. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 21:54, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Galendalia, The Latin word basilica (derived from Greek: βασιλική στοά, Royal Stoa, the tribunal chamber of a king) has three distinct applications in modern English. Old revision of article Elizium23 (talk) 21:57, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Saturday Evening Post

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Resolved

No, that magazine is officially "The Saturday Evening Post", just like its "The New York Times". Thanks, 2600:1004:B114:E087:C834:FAF5:3072:B856 (talk) 01:57, 10 May 2020 (UTC) :What are you talking about? You have to give me a link to the article or something that will tell me what you are talking about? Thanks Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 01:59, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

When I did the revert on the article, you had 'the' outside of the title, which is why it was flagged. It can take a moment to reflect on your pages, so it came in after you fixed it. I apologize for that, but the cached pages are in place on the server, so that causes a delay. You are good to go. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 02:09, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Carlos Gardel

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Thank you. However, I will reopen the case. The user was only blocked for 31 hours, and DRN is a constructive rather than a disruptive way to try to resolve the dispute. I will allow them to discuss the birthplace and birthdate controversy when they come off block. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:39, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: - I closed it as Material Scientist blocked the user for the exact same thing on the same article and the user attempt to appeal his block 2x both being declined. The editor has stated nothing new, even in their appeal requests. I would ask it not to be re-opened. Thanks, Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 18:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/User_talk:Pboni75#Notice_of_Dispute_resolution_noticeboard_discussion

User:Galendalia - Usually I favor harsh action against stubborn editors, and I think I understand your viewpoint. However, in this case, I see no harm done in allowing the editor to serve out their block and discuss the issue. The worst that can happen is that they might get indeffed. The best that might happen is that they might agree to participate in an RFC. A middle possibility is that they might serve their block and give up on Wikipedia, in which case the dispute will be closed as abandoned. If they resort to sockpuppetry, they were going to resort to sockpuppetry anyway, and will be banned. If they get indeffed, they were going to get indeffed anyway. You don't need to take part in the case if there is a case. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:58, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Gotcha @Robert McClenon:! That makes sense to me. I will keep an eye on it. Thanks again Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 19:00, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Teahouse Host

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Dear Galendalia, thank you for volunteering as a host at the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a community of people working together to make knowledge free. You are an important part of that effort! By joining as a Host, and by following our expectations, you are helping new users get a hold of the ropes here at Wikipedia, and helping experienced users who just have a question about how something works. We appreciate your willingness to help!

Here are some links you may find helpful as a Host:

• Helpful scripts you can install to make Teahouse responding easier,
• templates to use and, of course:
• the question forum itself.

Editors who have signed up as hosts, but who have not contributed at the Teahouse for six months or so may be removed from the list of hosts.

Regards Nick Moyes (talk) 10:14, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Rollback on legitimate IP additions

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Resolved

Could you please explain why you rolled back this? There was absolutely nothing wrong with the material you removed, and the 130.xxxxx IP is a good (and unregistered) contributor. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 18:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: My bad. It showed as a regular article and not any type of project. I will start using the pop-up page button to verify anything I am questioning. Again, I apologize. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 19:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

No worries, it happens. Could you replace the text you removed please, if you haven't done so already? Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:08, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Y @The Rambling Man: - I have put them back in. The second one was a little harder as their is a section not signed and I am assuming the same editor wrote it. Thanks again! Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 20:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:33, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Notability Assistance

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Thanks for the link Galendalia.

Crashingdown Man (talk) 01:48, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Advice

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hi – we had spoken on the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard regarding the Ahmaud Arbery page. I was wondering if I could ask your general advice. – Chrisvacc (talk) 02:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

It depends on what it is. If it has anything to do with the DR then no because it has to be restricted to the board. If it is outside of that realm and what the dispute was about then have at it! Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 02:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

No it doesn't really have to do with the DR. Kind of - but in a very roundabout way. I've just been noticing some disturbing trends about Neutrality in general on Wikipedia where users interject their political stances into the content of articles. Many of them happen to be Wikipedia Power Users and they und up bullying articles into submission. You seemed knowledgable so I was wondering where an appropriate place to bring this up would be. It's not about that dispute specifically, but I do think that's one example. – Chrisvacc (talk) 02:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I see a lot of stuff like citing sources that are not politically neutral, I'm wondering how I can start a discussion about this where the editorbase of WP can discuss this. I think there should be some guidelines about using apolitical sources over political ones. – Chrisvacc (talk) 03:09, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Chrisvacc: That is a great question. Here is the link to Neutral point of view. As you read through it it will cover all sorts of different topics and how to handle things. Now as far as any disputes here is our policy on Dispute Resolution. As I may not always be online, you can also ask questions at Teahouse where someone is always available 24/7 to assist you. I am also a host as well. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 03:29, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps I can write an Essay on apolitical sourcing? In my opinion I think that apolitical sources should be prefered to sources like Fox News, CNN, Vox and I think this is a good guideline for WP in general. More and more I've been noticing people choosing sources with known political motives.

• Home of the Media Bias Chart - Ad Fontes Media Version 5.0
• Media Bias/Fact Check - Search and Learn the Bias of News
• AllSides | Balanced news via media bias ratings for an unbiased news perspective

Do you think an essay like that would be well-received?

Thanks for the Teahouse link – Chrisvacc (talk) 03:37, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

We actually already have that in place. Let me see if I can find the page again as it’s not one I bookmark. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 03:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Or perhaps I'll just add those links to the NPOV page. – Chrisvacc (talk) 03:41, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Here is the page no need to reinvent the wheel. Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 03:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Alright thanks a ton. The issue is how relaible and how apolitical. Reliability exists on a spectrum. For example Reuters is more relaible than Buzzfeed News. Pew Research Center is more relaible than Vox. But all of those are considered Reliable on the list (and I agree they should be, but some are just more Reliable.) Maybe I'll bring up the issue on the Talk page. Thanks a ton for the links, super helpful. – Chrisvacc (talk) 03:58, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Just look at the comments added to them. Look at the row for CNN. If there are any you want to add, change, etc make sure your read the instructions and wait for consensus as we are a population not one individual person who overseas everything. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 04:10, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, the article is very good. Thanks. – Chrisvacc (talk) 04:21, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

DRN Magic

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Galendia- I am a volunteer on DRN. I had already responded to the person who opened the Magic case, because there is an open case on another dispute board- the NPOV board (I mistakenly said RFC, sorry about that) it does not qualify for the DRN now. I appreciate the desire to help, but I would appreciate a message, or being contacted if you think I have closed something in error before you revert the page. I realize this isn't a requirement, I'm just asking as a professional courtesy. Thank you. Nightenbelle (talk) 17:48, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

I also checked and did not see one. I just posted on your page at the same time. Can you link the RFC please? Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 17:50, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Invitation to WikiProject Reliability

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hi, Galendalia/Archive 1! Thanks for ensuring that articles are supported by reliable sources. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject Reliability, a collaborative effort to improve the reliability of Wikipedia articles. If you would like to participate, please visit WikiProject Reliability for more information. Feel free to sign your name under "Participants". Thanks! — Newslinger talk 05:48, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Page refunded

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Howdy hello! Happy to see ya sticking around. As requested, I have restored your user page. Let me know if there are any other pages you'd like to have restored. Smooth sailing, CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 16:13, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Cap'n! --Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 16:17, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

@CaptainEek: - Can you also do my subpages, please? --Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 16:20, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Galendalia, Done, I think I got 'em all. Ping me if I missed something :) CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 16:27, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Cap'n @CaptainEek: Looks good --Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 16:55, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Vanishing?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I see you've put a great many of your pages up for deletion and have mentioned vanishing, have you read the page on courtesy vanishing? We'd be sad to see you go, but I understand that sometimes Wikipedia loses its charm. You should have a very solid reason for doing so, though no need to share it. Beware: vanishing is meant to be permanent. If you'd simply like to stop editing, feel free. But if you wish to vanish, it is understood that you will not return, and if you do return, your account may need to be re-activated or it could be viewed as sockpuppetry. If you are vanishing for private reasons, or wish this conversation to be non-public, you should email a Wikipedia:Functionaries. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 23:56, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

If you have already contacted a functionary, feel free to ignore this message. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 23:57, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

I was surprised to see this too! Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 00:00, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

If this regards the trouble you ran into with DRN, I'm very sorry, and hope you reconsider. Entering new arenas can be vexing even for the best of us, as there are many unwritten rules that take time to learn. I've seen you around and appreciated your efforts, and hope you stick around. If not, I wish you the best. Smooth sailing, CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 00:09, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

No this has to do with the way in which admins are treating me from day one when I asked questions in the chat and having been spoken to rudely, then booted out and that just compounded from there and that just seems the norm. I have better things to do than be a victim of the cliques of admins on here that think they are the know-all and they have the final say. I have nothing more to say. I have filled out the form for the stewards. It had nothing to do with the DRN, however, it had to do with the comments people made about me being a part of it and attacking me. I am not here for that. Cheers and best of luck. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.107.73.181 (talk) 00:29, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

• Galendalia, if this is in response to our recent interaction at RSN, I would at least suggest taking a day/weekend off and then see if you still think that retiring from wikipedia is the right action. I assume you did gain some pleasure from your contributions here over the past month, and while the editing experience on wikipedia may not be pleasant in each instance, the overall effort can be worthwhile and pleasurable for many. So do give it another thought. All the best in whatever you decide. Abecedare (talk) 01:04, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
• Hi Galendalia, I'm sad to see that you want to leave. Starting 6 RfCs at once tends to provoke a negative reaction from the community, but there are plenty of other things you can do on Wikipedia to contribute to noticeboard maintenance if this is something you're interested in. I'm going to send you an invitation to WikiProject Reliability. Please let me know if you'd like to participate, and I'll be happy to show you the ropes. — Newslinger talk 05:46, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
• Hey, mate: It's a difficult time for many of us right now. Hope you're ok. I was surprised to see you talking of giving up here, so might I suggest you just simply walk away for a week or two and see how you feel later on? It's easy to get burnout, or feel the whole world is against you - but that's never the case. You know where I am if you need a private word. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:33, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
• It will be sad if you left, as you are a promising editor. I know it is was hard before this, but when the world world is shut up in a lockdown, it makes it harder. Take a wiki break, talk to someone privately, but don’t leave! Please don't, Best, Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 00:59, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
• +1 to the above. Wikipedia has a steep learning curve where you aren't as respected by the higher-ups, but I do encourage you to continue, perhaps after taking a wikibreak. You were a fantastic CVUA student, I'd hate to see you go. -- puddleglum^2.0 15:57, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

• So I did a LOT OF THINKING over the weekend. I have decided I am going to stay (if an admin could restore my profile page, I would appreciate it). I just need to let the constant barrage of attacks from certain people roll off of my back and when I have questions, I can go to those I have trust in like Puddle, Nick, and 4lines So I am going to resume what I was doing and I am going to take pride in it. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 15:55, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

• Lines Sighs In relive. You can go to Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion for your user page. If you already asked an admin you are welcome to Disregard this message. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 16:03, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Already done. However, can you fix my archive on my talk page please. It is not showing the archive box. Should be 2 days, and nothing needs to be left. Thanks @The4lines: --Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 16:12, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Your page is wired I can’t fix it? I don’t know what is wrong with it. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 16:57, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

You have to have 3 lines or less to do it --Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 17:01, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Everything that's older than 2 days will be archived tonight, and then it will show up in the {{talk header}}. Primefac (talk) 18:11, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Primefac: - I am also looking for other things that were archived and why the box didn't show up. --Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 18:12, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Your old naming scheme wasn't compatible with {{talk header}}. I moved your archive and it should be good to go. Primefac (talk) 18:13, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @Primefac: I will look tomorrow. --Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 18:15, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Rename

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hi, I'm interested as to why you renamed yourself. What happened? — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 10:04, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Yeah Why? Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 14:08, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

This was corrected!!

Cool I thought you were going to leave! Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 16:52, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Yay!

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Glad to see you return! Once you gain some more experience, I'm sure everything will be less discouraging - there is light at the end of the tunnel! If you have any questions or problems, you know where to go. I'm always open, and will do my best to respond to your questions in a timely fashion. Anyway, all that said: glad you're back! -- puddleglum^2.0 23:53, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @Puddleglum2.0:! --Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 18:49, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Discussion at mw:Talk:Growth/Personalized first day/Structured tasks

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

 You are invited to join the discussion at mw:Talk:Growth/Personalized first day/Structured tasks. (We need someone from the CVU there, and I noticed you recently commented on the talk page.) {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 00:03, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Done! Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 00:09, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

May 2020

link=:{{{project}}}:Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia#Suggestions

Hello, Galendalia/Archive 1. You have new messages at Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Interwiki talkback}} or {{Itb}} template.

— Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 07:44, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Can you clarify

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

what this is meant to achieve? Blocked or not, there rarely a reason for editors to change others' User pages, and I couldn't see any justification for doing so in these. And what is the "main list" that needs clearing? May I suggest you self-revert them. Many thanks! serial ^# 08:25, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@Serial Number 54129: The main lists for Gnomes and Fairies is done via the tag in the page. They were removed from the indefinite blocked users to clean up the main lists as the tag puts them in a category. In part of the stuff I’m doing is cleaning up stale parts of Wikipedia, which includes lists of various things. If the editor somehow gets their rights back they can re-add the tag if they want but having a list of 100 blocked users on a project page or otherwise is not needed and only takes up space. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 08:33, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

No; I suggest you seek a consensus for these changes at WP:AN, get some more eye on the problem. Indeed, it will establish if there is a problem that needs addressing. All the best, serial ^# 08:54, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

I disagree with you @Serial Number 54129:. Read WP:UOWN. I’m not making significant changes only minor therefore does not require a consensus as the editors are not coming back. This includes the addition/removal of tags. Have a great one! Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 09:20, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

You're getting UOWN backwards: it's saying that, in fact, you should only edit others' user pages to make significant changes ("rarely"), which is clearly intended to address blatant trolling, etc, and as such you should not be making cosmetic or minor to other users' pages. Also see 7.3.2: This should not be done for trivial reasons. serial ^# 09:38, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@Serial Number 54129:: Again I am disagreeing with you. It clearly states "...Bots and other users may edit pages in your user space or leave messages for you, though by convention others will not usually edit your user page itself, other than (rarely) to address significant concerns or place project-related tags..." - I am another editor, editing the user pages of indefinitely blocked users or sockpuppets. By getting the list cleaned up is considered project related. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 17:47, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --——Serial ^# 18:22, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Dispute Resolution: Rachel Reeves

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Copied to Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Comment_from_another_volunteer's_User_page by user PoliceSheep99

Defer to Wikipedia:DRN

Hi, I've never interacted with the Dispute Resolution system on Wikipedia before, but I think I may be able to provide some useful information as I have worked in the office of a former member of the Shadow Cabinet. My WP:COI deceleration is available on my userpage.

Rachel Reeves was appointed as Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to shadow Michael Gove who is the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster in the Second Johnson ministry. Gove also holds the role of Minister for the Cabinet Office - this is not disputed.

Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster is a new shadow cabinet position created this year by the new Labour Party leader Keir Starmer. However, the duties of this role were performed by Jon Trickett as Shadow Lord President of the Council. Trickett also held the position of Shadow Minister for the Cabinet Office - again, looking at the talk page for Reeves, this seems not to be disputed.

As the functions of the role Trickett held are almost identical to that of Reeves, it seems to me that his page can be used as precedent to also include Reeves' position of Shadow Minister for the Cabinet Office in the infobox.

Hope this helps. PoliceSheep99 (talk) 03:00, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi @PoliceSheep99: I am actually not the moderator on that dispute. I just posted the notices. When it’s formally opened you will see a statement by the moderator stating so and you can link them to this message so you don’t have to type it back out. Thanks for your input. Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up}|

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Your subscriptions with the Feedback Request Service

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hi Galendalia! You're receiving this notification because you were previously subscribed to the Feedback Request Service for one or both of the Good Article nomination categories "Arts" and "Everyday life".

You may have noticed that the Feedback Request Service has been inoperative for a number of months, and Yapperbot is currently in the process of taking over from Legobot in performing the requests. In that process, the subscription categories have been updated to match the current categories used by the Good Articles project, and neither "Arts" nor "Everyday life" is used anymore.

What this means is:

• If you were subscribed to "Arts", your preference has been transferred to Art and architecture as a new category, which you have automatically been opted in to. You may also be interested in Music and/or Media and drama; however, you have not automatically been opted in to these. If you wish to opt in to these, you should follow the process below.
• If you were subscribed to "Everyday life", you have been unsubscribed entirely from that category, as the category is too vague to assign to any of the new, more specific, categories.

You are encouraged to review your FRS preferences to ensure that they match your interests; there are a number of new categories you can now opt in to additionally. To do this, you should:

1. Go to the Feedback Request Service page.
2. If you were previously subscribed to "Arts" and wish to unsubscribe from "Art and architecture", scroll to that subheading and remove your {{Frs user}} template.
3. If you wish to subscribe to an additional category, you should do so by pasting {{Frs user|{{subst:currentuser}}|limit}} underneath the relevant heading, where limit is the maximum number of requests you wish to receive for that category per month.
4. Publish the page.

Please note that any subscription preferences you had with the FRS for requests for comment have not been affected by these changes.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask on the Feedback Request Service talk page, or on Yapperbot's operator's talk page. Thank you!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 21:21, 22 May 2020 (UTC).

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hello

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

It was the reliable sources of times of India please do not remove in use temple from their I am still working on it Thehitavada (talk) 21:08, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Thehitavada you cannot delete any templates without an explanation regardless if you are working on them or not. Also when it comes up in our vandalism software a score is assigned and since you blanked out information en masse and again provided no reason for deletion, it gets reverted. Here at Wikipedia we have strict policies involving the biographies of living people and recently deceased. You can view everything here on the Wikipedia:Blp page to help guide you. I noticed you also just created your profile, so I am going to post a standard welcome message to your talk page that will provide other guides for you, which includes the Manual of Style which is how we edit articles and the policies and procedures. Thanks, Galendalia (talk) 21:36, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

ANI redux

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Galendalia, while you are undoubtedly aware of the original ANI discussion, I have highlighted some broader concerns. Please take a look and feel free to respond there, at your leisure. Abecedare (talk) 23:12, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Now what?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Why are you leaving? Give me a good reason and I’ll leave you forever, Ok? Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 23:55, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Look at ani Galendalia (talk) 00:12, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I dont see where? Never mind. Please dont attack other users. I suggest backing away from a lot of things, and just stay where you feel like you know that area. User:Moneytrees gave me a good sentence that applies to you. Don’t go every where. Even if you are good intentioned it generally does not go good with the editors. Like he told to stick to Copyvios, NPP, and articles. Just stay in a few places, or your burn out early, or what you just did. Come back and Ill be happy to mentor you. Replied on your ANI. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 00:13, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Who's gonna take care of the revived project now?! Galendalia, take a look at Wikipedia:Rage quit or some of the pages linked there to put things in perspective. Declaring retirement in light of a conflict is a dime a dozen and I bet you'll come back like most of them—because you clearly care about the project. Nobody's really accusing you of bad faith; that's good. Your transgression in question is nothing compared to the ones a lot of more thick-skinned editors get accused of and get away with (for good or ill). Follow The4lines' advice and I'm sure everybody will just move on. Nardog (talk) 01:43, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I agree with the above. We all make mistakes, the important is to learn from them. The particular problem at ANI is unrelated to your WikiProject efforts and if you stop editing user pages, that particular disruption is over. As you already know, there's much to do on Wikipedia. —PaleoNeonate – 06:45, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I posted my final comment on the ANI. I direct you to that please. Galendalia (talk) 07:04, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Spoken Wikipedia

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hello, I wish you well on reinvigorating the Spoken Wikipedia project! Please, no need to send any further mass talk page messages to previous Spoken Wikipedia participants. You've sent two already and they interested parties can follow on the project page if they are interested. Also, please reconsider referring to yourself as "the Project Coordinator." As with most things on Wikipedia, it's best to think of it as more of a collaborative effort. -- Norvy (talk) 07:10, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Norvy: I apologize for the notifications. The participant list should be finalized by the end of the month. If you are not interested you can remove yourself from the project and you will not get any more messages. Messages will be sent out periodically to encourage any discussions on the talk page as not everyone pays attention and I may need to draw attention to it. While I do agree with your statement about the collaborative effort which covers all of Wikipedia, all projects have the main coordinator who oversees the project. I only add that to my signature when it is related to the project, otherwise, it is my standard signature. Thanks again for your input! Galendalia (talk) 07:20, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Mentor

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

@The4lines: Thank you for your offer. I’m accepting the fact you can adopt me and carry me on a leash to help show the way. Wanna do the user boxes?

Galendalia (talk) 06:56, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Sure, the box of that said that I adopted you? Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 14:24, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Here ya go {{Adopter|Galendalia}} and I have created a page for us to use (User_talk:Galendalia/adoption_chat). I am so excited. Of course we also have IRC as you know. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 16:03, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Perfect, I am excited too, because you are my first adoptee. If you gave questions ask it in the talk page! Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 16:13, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The King

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

 Deferred to Talk: The King (2019 film)
Come to the talk page for the King. I have added a lot there to consider. The text you have reverted to is completely bias, is the opinion of one man and contradicts wikipedias own entry for the battle.87.112.15.36 (talk) 00:45, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A cookie for you!

Hi Galendalia. I see that Creffett recently pulled your rollback access. I can see that you've been doing good work and I know you've put a lot of effort into Wikipedia, and while I agree with Creffett's action and message, I want to emphasize that I appreciate your work as an editor and that I think your work makes us better as an encyclopedia. I hope you're doing otherwise well and if you have any questions or ever want to talk my talk page is thataway. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 02:55, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

+1 As your adopter, I would like to echo on what L235 said. if you need help feel free to ask on the adoption page, or my talk page which is Thisaway (Lol @L235:) Best, Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 03:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Can I get milk with that cookie please L235? Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 03:58, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Explain my revert

... of your recent comment at ANI:

• See WP:TPO: "Generally, you should not break up another editor's text by interleaving your own replies to individual points. This confuses who said what and obscures the original editor's intent. In your own posts, you may wish to use the {{Talk quotation}} or {{Talkquote}} templates to quote others' posts."
• You are welcome to re-add your comment at the bottom of the section at ANI if you wish but IMO the post-hoc justification is reflective of the general "not accepting fault, learning, moving on" conduct that others and I have commented upon. Note that your latest post does not really explain your actual revert of the user's edits or the incorrect explanation you gave in the edit-summary and later on your talkpage.

Let me know if you have any questions. Abecedare (talk) 23:08, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@Abecedare: Thank you and understood. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 23:20, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Mentor

I saw your AN/I post, I would love to be a co mentor alongside someone else. I have no idea why I said you were out of line, when I knew you were not stepping out of line. I must of been Fucking the hell out my mind at the point to say that. I have no idea why I said that look through your cont. Please accept my pardon. Best, W- Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 00:41, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

What's Up?

Hey I saw you put everything back? What's up? Oh I see your post, I'm sorry if I made you feel like I did not trust you, but I'm not trying to not help you I'm trying to help you, it is for the greater good. Again sorry, if you want my mentorship please ask me again. Would you like to talk on IRC? Sorry and please trust me -W Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 20:59, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Would you like to talk on IRC? Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 23:38, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey @The4lines: I’m getting your messages but slow down please. I’m busy IRL ;) (btw remove your real name) lol Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 00:55, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry ment to remove this message. Thanks for the name alert :) Sorry again. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 00:58, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

A pie for you!

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Please accept this Pie as a pardon. Signed,The4lines |||| (You Asked?) (What I have Done.) 00:53, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks! Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 17:02, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
• No problem, would you mind if I was a co mentor? I mean if you don't want me it is fine, but I liked being your mentor for about a day..... W-Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 17:06, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

• Honestly The4lines it would be up to whoever decided they wanted to be my adopter. I do not see me having a choice in the matter right now. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 17:08, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Right, I hope it is a mentor that lets me be a co mentor :) Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 17:13, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Reverting your revert

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hey Galendalia. Just wanted to let you know I reverted your revert as HaWikiGoEdit's revision integrated the phrase into the prose. Hope you're doing well! —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:02, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Spoken Article Review

Hi there, I'm interested as to while you failed Ovinus Real's recordings. I couldn't find your review anywhere, and, when I checked, the recording seemed completely fine. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 08:24, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Sentences are missing and some content was skipped over in the paragraphs. Both of these were right towards the beginning. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 08:28, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

The review is in the discussion page ;) Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 08:28, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Again, I'd appreciate it if you could be more specific. I can't find any mistakes. I'm a bit peeved that the recording I spent several hours on has been failed without recourse for me to improve it Ovinus (talk) 08:30, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

I will double check tomorrow but one of them on the FA you either cut out or skipped over 1/2 of the first sentence. I’ll be happy to listen again in the AM. I try to read the article as well while I’m listening to it. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 08:32, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ovinus Real: & @Berrely: Review completed. I need to fix my sound on the computer as to why it skipped but yeah you are good to go and can post them in the articles. Thanks and keep on speaking! Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 08:58, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Sure, but per the recording guidelines, you are allowed to edit the script for readability, so that shouldn't have been a problem. Even if it was, per the reviewing guidelines, that wouldn't have been sufficient enough to downright fail the Ovinus. As well as that, you don't fail or pass recordings, they are reviews. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 12:11, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Berrely - I just read through the guidelines and I do not see that. Could you kindly point me to where it says you may omit portions of the article for readability, please? As far as passing/failing, there is a rating system. Those ratings determine the quality of the audio. I will lay this out on the review page on what determines a fail/pass. One thing I want to do is make sure our group provides the highest quality recordings as we do not know who will be listening to these. We also need to make sure no bias it introduced or anything that is not part of the article. I hope this helps and I will be providing more information on the project talk page. Thanks again! Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 13:38, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia/Article choice guidelines#Step 2: Copyedit — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 14:13, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Spoken Wikipedia mandatory review process

Hi Galendalia,

first of all, thank you very much for reviving WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia.

I am concerned about the unilateral attempt to introduce a review process in Special:Diff/959783323, with yourself as the "lead coordinator" "promoting" "authorized reviewers" in "rank"s (Special:Diff/959785326, Special:Diff/959787788), stating that the "list will grow as [you] get to know people".

This is not how Wikipedia works; please have a look at the five pillars and the policy against ownership of content. The attempted introduction of "ranks" makes it hard to interpret this as a misunderstanding; it really seems to have been done with an underlying philosophy that is likely to be strongly opposed if brought to a proper Wikipedia-wide discussion at a village pump.

If an audio file was boldly added to an article, but is bad, do feel free to remove it: That's what WP:BRD has been proven to work for, not limited to audio files. To make it easy to review all audio files added to the wiki, an edit filter might be worth an idea, for automatically tagging audio file additions. This requires no authorization and can easily be done like any other kind of recent changes patrolling.

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:05, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

@ToBeFree: To be perfectly clear, someone else created the box and posted it about the project being revived and use the project talk page or mine. So for you to accuse me of “self-promotion” is incorrect. What if I created something to the effect that would encourage them to join the project or at least read the project pages before doing the audio? What would you suggest for wording on that? I feel once the project gets going again we would be able to hold elections like GOCE is doing (starting Monday I believe) for the positions. I could have better worded what I put on the page. As for the time being, I am the project coordinator, lead coordinator, however, you choose to word it. I was following the ranks of GOCE for this in which they have "Lead Coordinator" and "Coordinators." Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 02:24, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Please don't get in to hot water by fighting admins. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 03:56, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

I'll second that thought. When an experienced editor, an admin no less, points out that there may be WP:OWN issues, as that is what seems to be happening, you should take that advice to heart and tread lightly.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 04:44, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP: I did and it even says so in my response on what I’m looking to do. I haven’t reverted their edits either except for one (however I removed the “WP:OWN” piece as the omboxes are universal across the project for the time being as I move pages around and get the project built up. I am looking into the edit filter so I know what to request and how to request it. For now I just have that page on my watch list so I can see if any articles get audio added to them. I also asked for their advice. The admin has yet to respond as I’m sure they are busy. With that said I am open to ideas for the project as I’ve pointed out numerous times and even on the project talk page. I want to get the project more on the paces with both GOCE and Mil as it looks like they have the best setups especially if I can get it promoted to the point almost all articles from C class and up have excellent audio. I listened to a few today and some where utterly devastating and you could hardly understand or hear them. As far as arguing I’m not arguing with the admin above, I was in a heated debate with another admin, who again is accusing me of various things, bringing up the ANI, and again telling me what I can and cannot do. They also talked about when I first joined I tried GOCE but I made too many mistakes and left them. I have worked on this project since I started as well as CVU. For them to say I’m not following my words from the ANI and stating I left GOCE to do another project is simply not true. I started day one on Spoken. A couple days later I made my attempt with GOCE and it didn’t work our. I’m ok with that and always have been and all but forgotten it until this other admin brought it up. There is a huge difference in being an admin to be helpful and being an admin who is on a different agenda all together. You are one of the good ones. My adopter is one of the good ones. I am patiently waiting a response from the admin who opened this thread to respond with ideas. The other admin (which I removed the conversation) was basically attacking me and I don’t even know who they are or why they even got involved in what is a simple discussion between two people. I hope the makes sense. Thanks Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 05:05, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

ToBeFree I have requested the edit filter as you recommended. It’s at Wikipedia:Edit_filter/Requested Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 08:07, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)To be honest @Galendalia: I was a bit confused when you appointed me as a reviewer. I had already reviewed a couple dozen audio files and plenty of other users were reviewing as well. I don't think personally appointing reviewers is the best course of action for a project that is meant to be freely editable and open. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 08:30, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh. I seem to have a predilection for being unaware of previous interactions with or about a user when talking to them. I simply don't remember usernames in this way. I came here via the WP:RFPP request, and I was completely unaware that The4lines had talked to me about mentoring a user named "Galendalia" before (User_talk:ToBeFree/Archive_12#Mentor). I was also a bit surprised by others' reactions when reading this discussion on a mobile phone, but the surprise was quickly resolved by searching the history of this talk page for large text deletion(s). Okay. Well. I only have one thing left to say, and that is, please listen to others' concerns, especially if you disagree about them so much that you need to silence them on your talk page. WP:DISRUPTSIGNS comes to mind. Thanks and best regards, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:33, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Conduct

I had hoped, when I closed the ANI discussion concerning you, that you would have taken onboard the concerns of many other editors, as you intimated. I was therefore surprised and concerned to see your response to Ponyo in this edit. Administrators routinely come across editors that cause them concern, and will leave a message suggesting improvements or changes in their conduct that it is hoped that they would take on-board. Ponyo was simply communicating with you some concerns about your conduct, similar concerns others have expressed. We can all see that you're keen and want to contribute to the project, but as much as we enjoy having enthusiastic new editors join, if their behaviour is sufficiently egregious to cause existing editors to leave or downscale their contributions, we are left with a user who is sadly a net negative. That's an area you are in very real danger of entering with your behaviour on the Spoken Wikipedia WikiProject, as much as we all appreciate the project being revitalised, if your behaviour deters people from contributing, we would rather it remains mothballed. I'm also rather curious as to how someone who (as far as I can tell) hasn't contributed a single Spoken Wikipedia recording, believes themselves to be an appropriate person to co-ordinate the project ?
If we (the administrator corps) on the project don't witness substantial improvement in your conduct immediately, the next steps will be to prohibit you from making any edits in the Wikipedia namespace, this would remove you from your position as Spoken Wikipedia co-ordinator. It's not something we would ideally want to do, but if you continue to behave in a way that is deterring to contributors and can be considered disruptive, alternatives to manage your conduct will have to be considered. You've already been given a significant amount of leeway that is not always extended to new contributors causing low-level disruption, please do not use up the last of the good will that exists for you within the community. Nick (talk) 11:19, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2020

• From the editor: Meltdown May?

• News and notes: 2019 Picture of the Year, 200 French paid editing accounts blocked, 10 years of Guild Copyediting

• In the media: CBS on COVID-19, Sanger on bias, false noses, and five prolific editors

• Discussion report: WMF's Universal Code of Conduct

• Special report: The sum of human knowledge? Not in one Wikipedia language edition

• Featured content: Weathering the storm

• Arbitration report: Board member likely to receive editing restriction

• Traffic report: Come on and slam, and welcome to the jam

• Op-Ed: Where Is Political Bias Taking Us?

• Gallery: Wildlife photos by the book

• News from the WMF: WMF Board announces Community Culture Statement

• Recent research: Automatic detection of covert paid editing; Wiki Workshop 2020

• Community view: Transit routes and mapping during stay-at-home order downtime

• On video: COVID-19 spurs innovations in Wikimedia video and virtual programming

• WikiProject report: Revitalizing good articles

• On the bright side: 500,000 articles in the Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia

• Obituaries: Dmitrismirnov, Kattenkruid, Muidlatif, Ronhjones, Tsirel

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:05, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at [[Wikipedia:Requested_templates#{{Spoken_Wikipedia_process_wrapper}}]]

 You are invited to join the discussion at [[Wikipedia:Requested_templates#{{Spoken_Wikipedia_process_wrapper}}]]. - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 13:40, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Well, that didn't quite work... but you get the point - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 13:43, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @Rich Smith:. I took a look at Wikipedia:Requested_templates#Spoken_Wikipedia_process_wrapper Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 15:24, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Definition of Hindutva

Hi, with all due respect, the first person to term 'Hindutva' was Savarkar. Just because some people believe it to be 'fascist' without reading the book or worse, without understanding it, they've thought it to be 'fascist' in nature, they're entitled to think of it in a particular manner but they do not have the right to make other people misinterpret the actual meaning of the word. If you've read the book, it talks of harmony and celebration of difference and common love for fatherland and Savarkar does not think of 'Hindu' in a religious manner but a geographical term and goes to the extent of interchanging it with 'Sindhu'. He was an outright atheist which further backs it up. I have no issues with anybody personally but i do not wish for people to misinterpret the beautiful idea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Not Sherlock (talk • contribs) 19:43, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Not Sherlock, Due to the nature of the article and the sanctions imposed on it, it still requires a consensus by the community. I cannot just add it based on one persons opinion. I apologize for this, but this is how Wikipedia works. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 20:00, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Archiving Talk:World language discussions

Hi Galendalia, a moment ago you added an archiving template to Talk:World language. Do you know how to delay archiving the discussions Talk:World language#Spanish language map and Talk:World language#Spanish Language Map that I linked to from Talk:World language#Semi-protected edit request on 6 June 2020 today? Love —LiliCharlie (talk) 18:19, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

LiliCharlie, They will not be archived until 30 days after the last edit to that discussion. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 18:28, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Talk:World language#Spanish language map and Talk:World language#Spanish Language Map are much older than 30 days, but my links should still work until the discussion Talk:World language#Semi-protected edit request on 6 June 2020 is closed. Note that this doesn't seem to be the case, despite your answer to the edit request. User:DLMcN who contributed a lot to Talk:World language#Spanish language map just added a their first contribution to Talk:World language#Semi-protected edit request on 6 June 2020. Love —LiliCharlie (talk) 18:41, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

LiliCharlie, You are talking about 2 different things here. The archive will archive the discussions that have not had any edits in the past 30 days. Once an edit is made to them, it resets the timer. The Links you have provided were just created today so they will not be archived. I believe you are asking about your edit request which needs consensus. This will not be archived for 30 days after the last edit to that particular discussion. The maps you have in that discussion are safe as they are part of the new discussion you started today and when they were posted in other discussions has no bearing on the archiving process as it only relates to the discussion itself. The discussions up to, and including, "Old Tamil" will be archived tonight, but will be accessible in the archive link which will be generated by the system. I hope this helps clear it up for you. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 18:50, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't want the old discussions Talk:World language#Spanish language map and Talk:World language#Spanish Language Map to be archived before the current discussion Talk:World language#Semi-protected edit request on 6 June 2020 is definitely closed. Alternatively, I want my links to Talk:World language#Spanish language map and Talk:World language#Spanish Language Map to be automatically redirected to where those discussions are archived to. Love —LiliCharlie (talk) 18:59, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

LiliCharlie, You are still not understanding me. The discussion or any part of it (which includes the maps because they are in the discussion topic) will not be archived until 30 days go by in which no edits to the discussion have happened. Your actual maps are hosted in commons and they are not included in the archive from that site, just the article talk page. One of them with the giant map is over 3 years old so it will be archived as it is out of date and you have created a new map to replace it. The archive cannot pick and choose which ones to archive. Once it is archived, you can add a link to it in the current discussion to that particular discussion. What would be the reason why you would want to keep a discussion that is over 3 years old alive? The entire page is way too long and goes back over 5 years, which is why archiving is being put in place. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 19:11, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Galendalia. I've found the {{Do not archive until}} template which I think does what I was looking for. Love —LiliCharlie (talk) 19:31, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

LiliCharlie, I am advising you not to edit the template as it will leave a lot of discussions on the page that are irrelevant. You can link to the archived discussion that you need in your current discussion instead of leaving all discussions in place that are not needed. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 20:02, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Nominating a regular-looking user page for G11

This wasn't appropriate. I have removed the speedy. If you objected to his web site being linked there, you should have said that on his user page. I really fail to see how any of it was advertising. Remember that ANI of a week or so ago where you said you would restrict your activities to things you know about? This might be an area that requires some restriction. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 20:12, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

ThatMontrealIP, I did it under Wikipedia:User_pages#Personal_and_privacy-breaching_material of which I am allowed to do to bring it to the attention of an administrator. If you have an issue with that, then maybe your own actions need to be under scrutiny. If you want to restrict me, then do so and I will fight it. I am done with all of you playing god against me when I see others doing the same thing. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 20:33, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

The G11 template you put on it is for promotional pages. But you are saying above that it is a privacy breach, which in some cases is a valid reason to get rid of the material. In this case the user intentionally put it there back in 2010. Can you explain how it breaches anyone's privacy? I'm just trying to understand your reasoning.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 20:40, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Also, you have misread Wikipedia:User_pages#Personal_and_privacy-breaching_material. It's not a policy for reporting people's emails and web sites when they appear by the user's choice on their user page. Their privacy is not breached here, as they voluntarily posted it. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 20:43, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

”Privacy-breaching non-public material, whether added by yourself or others, may be removed from any page upon request, either by administrators or (unless impractical) by purging from the page history and any logs by oversighters (see requests for oversight).” with the intent of bringing it to the administrators attention. To me it doesn’t matter when they posted it as I just saw it and reported it for an administrator to review and take whatever action they feel is necessary or none, their choice. For you to turn around, mention my ANI, and threaten to restrict me is extremely inappropriate on your part as this was an AGF but none of you admins ever see that. You are all seeking to silence me which is inappropriate. I’m no longer taking part in this discussion. Do what you will I really don’t give a s*** at this point. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 21:04, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, the thing is, there is no privacy-breaching material, as the user posted it. G11 is also the wrong template. Putting a G11 on the user page of someone who has been here for ten years is a bit extreme also. The thing to do next time is just post a little note on their talk page asking about it. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:10, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Then just say that instead of threatening to restrict someone based on an AGF please. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 21:15, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Oh, I think you need to read that sentence again. There was no threat. I was suggesting that you follow your own plan to restrict yourself to areas you are familiar with.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:17, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Galendalia, I noticed the speedy deletion template that you left on DLMcN's user page. It was inappropriate. I can see that you did it in good faith and didn't mean to be rude, but it was a mistake - a faux pas or gaffe - and you might want to consider apologizing to them for the upset it caused.

You misinterpreted the section of the user page guidelines on personal and privacy-breaching material. Generally such material may be removed on request of the person whose privacy it concerns if they were the one who added it. You could politely inform a new user that using their real name, e-mail address, or website, might lead to privacy problems in the future, if it seems like they're not aware of that. But if someone chooses to do it anyway, it's not your place to interfere. I'm baffled as to how this led you to the idea that you should try to delete their user page for "blatant advertising or promotion"; in any case it was certainly not the right course of action.

I saw that you also edited another user's user page yesterday: [1]. These edits surprise me because apparently the main complaint at a recent ANI report about you was "misunderstanding of our userpage guidelines which are pretty clear that "by convention others will not usually edit your user page itself, other than (rarely) to address significant concerns or place project-related tags"; and the first comment it received was "Short copyright problem, BLP problem or some sort of extreme polemic...do not alter user pages". I would suggest that you voluntarily refrain from editing anyone's user page in the near future; if you see a problem discuss it with the user on their talk page or consult an admin, as you are currently on very thin ice in this area.

I'm also somewhat concerned by your reaction to ThatMontrealIP above, as there was no threat or anything inappropriate said. As a new user, if experienced editors tell you that you've made a mistake, please try to be open to the idea that, according to Occam's razor, the most likely explanation is that you've actually made a mistake, rather than assuming that they are attacking you for no particular reason, and attacking them back. Thanks for your understanding, and please let me know if there was something I wasn't clear about. --IamNotU (talk) 01:15, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

@IamNotU: yeah go to hell! No need for you to fill my page with stuff already addressed by someone! As far as the COI I was correcting it so that the COI notice appeared correctly as they didn’t have it and only had a sentence. So again, go to hell! Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 02:42, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Galindalia - hurling personal insults at other users is listed as a Wikipedia code violation. Regards, --DLMcN (talk) 04:03, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

@DLMcN: and having a bunch of administrators piling up on me is harassment. So what’s the point? Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 04:18, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Help, help! I'm being oppressed! Come see the violence inherent in the system! Elizium23 (talk) 04:25, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 11:40, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Accidental rollback

I was looking at your contributions on my mobile device and intended to click on the diff button, the rollback option was directly below. A case of fat thumbs. I reverted back to the previous version. – ².O.^Boxing 12:33, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Squared.Circle.Boxing, No worries. It happens. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 18:25, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Comment

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Galendalia (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

You have blocked me for something in which not one single editor involved in any discussion has met any of these requirements as stated in WP:CIR in which you are claiming to have blocked me for.

Violated by numerous editors and even admins:

1. "come down hard like a ton of bricks on someone as soon as they make a mistake."
2. It does not mean we should ignore people and not try to help improve their competence. In fact for most, it was quite the opposite
3. It does not mean that Wikipedia's civility policy does not apply when talking to people about required competence. Rude and uncivil comments are discouraging, and can raise psychological barriers against recognizing one's mistakes or improving one's skills.

Responding to suspected lack of competence - How many times was I called incompetent and told to find something else to do? Count all of them please then you will realize why I have been such an ass to certain people.

1. One must take care when responding to the perceived lack of competence in others. Be mindful of what incompetence is and is not. Incompetence is not lack of knowledge. Responding to competence issues requires care and understanding of the background of a situation. - Again see above statement
2. Repeated mistakes: If a user is making repeated mistakes, verify whether the user has been given any advice or instruction in how to do things correctly. Most users want to contribute productively but simply may not know how to do so. If it appears no-one has explained a problem with their edits, doing so should always be the first step. There are two ways to explain mistakes, (a) direct explanation and (b) showing the better way. In either case, use their talk page to introduce yourself, provide diffs while explaining the problems, and direct them to further readings or to forums such as Wikipedia:Teahouse or Wikipedia:Help desk. In the vast majority of cases, this will be sufficient and no further action will be needed. - Not once did this happen by the administrators or editors in these ANI's did this happen. Instead, it was about me and my "incompetence" in other areas of WP.
3. Alleging incompetence: It is generally inadvisable to call a person "incompetent" or their editing "incompetent". While being direct with problems is advisable, it is possible to be direct without being insulting. Telling people their work displays incompetence does nothing to improve their work; it only serves to put them on the defensive, making them less receptive to instruction. - Look at the comments especially from Prax and Pony. Enough said. Notice that this causes people to be on the defensive so yes a lot of times I have been on the defensive based on comments from these editors and admins.

1. Before bringing an issue to the incidents noticeboard or another similar venue, you should have exhausted all reasonable attempts to communicate with the user and correct their behavior. Use their talk page, explain things to them, and demonstrate how to do things correctly. - This was very rarely done and it was only done by the few who have interacted with me on a reasonable level and not attack me. By implementing this "Essay" as a reason for my block is not a policy however an attack to sequester me from constructively editing pages as I have been doing.

I am requesting (since I am blocked) that this go to arbitration since I cannot open the request myself and that no one involved in the discussion, nor the blocking admin review this request.

This is a blatant misuse of Administrative powers in order to silence me from a dispute.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Primefac (talk) 19:44, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 19:39, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for General WP:CIR and personal attacks.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  TonyBallioni (talk) 19:12, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

• Very sorry to see this, although I can't help but agree with the rationale - Galendalia, I'm sorry to see you blocked like this, I hope you can take a bit of a break, maybe look at WP:SO, and if you feel ready to contribute positively, request an unblock. Whatever happens, all my best goes to you and yours - wherever you are, stay safe and well. Cheers, -- puddleglum^2.0 19:45, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Block Comment

Primefac one of the reasons I was blocked is because I edited a users page by correcting the COI. Well guess what, the policy on WP:COI states I can do this by stating Note that someone else may add this for you. The policy should be changed if you guys are going to block someone for this. I have every right to defend myself if someone else is accusing me of wrong doing when it is right in your own policies. Same with the speedy deletion in which I exactly quoted and was still told I misread it when it exactly states whether you or others put it there which has been my argument about all of this. But again, I was told I was incompetent on this and basically being told I can’t read English and I misinterpreted it. What is there in that statement to misinterpret? That was never explained because the admins can’t explain it, instead they want to elaborate on me being an ass and telling them to “fuck off” and “go to hell” and “I didn’t want their POV” as I wanted the POV from the admin who started this and he/she still never explained how I misinterpreted this statement. Instead admins piled up on me and are claiming I caused them to do more work. None of those two things needed to be undone as by policy I have every right as an editor to follow policy and a) report what I see (not investigate) and b) fix the COI code on someone’s page as they didn’t put it in properly and by policy I am allowed to do so. This went from my content editing being disruptive because they could not prove why they even took me to ANI based on these statements which I have maintained throughout the process to making it about what I said to others. No one seems to care about how I was talked to or how admins handled this with me but god forbid I stand up to admins and prove my point and since they had no proof that what I did on these 2 edits broke policy it turned into an admin pile on against me. My next step is going to be arbitration for the abuse of administrative powers to silence me and the way I’ve been treated since day one from certain individuals and since you’ve blocked me I’ll need to email this in. I will not apologize for my remarks until the admins and other editors involved in these discussions and accusations apologize to me for their behavior towards me. Add to that the templated response for denying my appeal to the block which doesn’t even address one single thing I brought up but instead puts all the blame on me. Yeah good try. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 00:16, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nick: also adding you since you closed the topic as Tony blocked me against your own policies in which he stated the diffs in the initial complaint were enough to warrant the block. Actually both of the items I performed are in the policies as something that I as an editor am allowed to do. See links above. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 00:23, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

I don’t think telling Ponyo “fuck you too” is in line with our policies. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:34, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni: Neither is an admin telling me I’m so incompetent that I can’t read a simple statement that says whether you or others put it there and that I misinterpreted it. It started with me doing nothing wrong. I’ve never had any conversations with Ponyo but they seem to have a lot to say about me for never once having any interaction with me except on the ANI board. When the admins and I guess I can call them senior editors throw out the WP:Bait and I take it, I’m the fool for doing so. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 00:42, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

So when an involved admin advises you it's harassment, but when an uninvolved one does they're still wrong because you have never had any conversations with them? I hope you see the slight logical issue there. M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 00:44, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Galendalia, some unsolicited advice: go take a break. Seriously: click log out, turn off your computer, and do something else. Take your mind off Wikipedia for a while. You aren't on a path toward being unblocked at the moment, and continuing will not help anything. You were blocked not just because of the edits you made, but how you interacted with other people while making those edits. You have rushed into several situations, made mistakes, and then attacked or dismissed those who have disagreed with your actions. For an unblock request to be successful, you must account for your problematic behavior, not repeat it. When you are ready, you can come back. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 00:47, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

@Galendalia: this is good advice that AntiCompositeNumber is giving you. I wanted to add that you are misunderstanding several things. First, only about 20% of the people who pointed out that there were problems are admins. Most of the people posting at ANI are not admins, although several are (Ponyo, TonyBallioni, and Primefac above, for example). You frequently referred too me as an admin, but I am not one. (You can enable "Navigation popups" to quickly see what rights a user has). Second, perhaps if you politely ask one of the above admins for the precise reason you were blocked, it will help you to understand your situation. You can then think about it, and if you come back, correct your actions. From just about everything you have posted above and on ANI, I get the feeling you do not understand why you were blocked or ran into problems. It is not really about your content edits as far as I can see, but rather about how you responded. But I am not an admin and I did not block you. So ask one of the admins (politely). ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:57, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

@M Imtiaz: I’m not sure where you get harassment from as that has nothing to do with this conversation or the reasons I’ve been blocked.

@AntiCompositeNumber: I hear you. It’s not about just me though. It’s also about the admins and senior editors also needing to be held accountable for their actions. If I get attacked I’m attacking back. That’s me. I pointed out that I did follow policy in the two things listed in this ANI but not one person even looked into it and said “oh he is right, the policy does say that. It was AGF. Instead it was a pile up on me saying I’m incompetent amongst other things. Just like with the project. I didn’t create nor post the OMBoxes someone else did but yet I got blamed for creating them. I only created one which I accepted responsibility for and understood what they were saying and let it go. Yet the conversation ended up involving other editors who once again blamed me for doing it when an experienced editor created them and put it up of which I didn’t even ask for but instead of admins faithfully executing the who and the why, it was a pile up on me again. Just like everything else. Like I stated some users I’ve never had interactions with but when I’m in ANI they write 4 paragraphs on me but not once followed their own advice of pointing me in the right direction. It’s a common issue in this world with people in management. They want the title and pay but want everyone else to do the work. Granted to my knowledge no one gets paid in the admin group but I do not know that. I asked for the block to be reviewed with all evidence and that wasn’t even done. It was a quick glance and templated response. How is that fair to editors? I have backed off of everything and I mentioned numerous times and I mean numerous times in the first ANI about being the project coordinator for spoken. Not one single person said a word about it. The moment the ANI was closed I was getting pummeled (again) for going somewhere I had no business being and even one person made the comment to the effect of you haven’t even recorded one thing so how can you lead the project. It doesn’t matter if I have recorded anything or not. I do not like my voice. I never have. I don’t even like talking on the phone. Doesn’t mean I cannot effectively run a project especially considering I’m an IT Project Management Certified professional. I could have easily called that person out but I didn’t. I let it go. Matter of fact I don’t even think it was a full 48 hours after the first ANI that I was addressed by an admin for the project in which they never stated prior any objection and then they proceeded to state that I’m breaking my own promise of staying away from things. Boom! There it was. Yet another attack on me. I think I’ve said enough to get my point across. I’m going to start working on the email and the list of names for submission. Thank you though Anti for always being helpful and helping me out when I’ve asked you questions. That was appreciated. @ThatMontrealIP: my apologies for saying you were an admin as you do come off as one. However the rest still stands as I was correct in what I did and I pointed that out to you on my talk page but instead of apologizing to me you accused me of misinterpreting a statement which very, very clearly states I can do that as an editor and instead of saying anything else you kept defending your statement instead of seeing what I wrote then took me to ANI with the subject of “Galendalia, Again” that is what pushed me over the edge. Plus the fact you didn’t notify me made it even worse. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 01:15, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure where you get harassment from - Special:Diff/961198209, enough said? M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 01:18, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Galendalia, You clearly don't understand your situation. Just ask one of the admins (politely) why you were blocked. You can't get unblocked without some understanding, which you do not currently have. That said, thank you for your contributions and I wish you well. I am going to unwatch this page.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:19, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

PS do not bother with arbcom as you do not qualify as a type of block that they would review. Your block is justified and reasonable.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:21, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

I received a short block (a justifiable one) when I first began editing and had my unblock request accepted within a few hours, so I’ll give you some first hand advice. If you want an unblock request to be accepted, you firstly need to understand the reason of your block, so taking ThatMontrealIP's advice would be wise; politely ask an admin for the exact reasons for your block. Acknowledge and understand the reasons, take full responsibility for your actions and make it clear that you will not engage in whatever actions lead to the block. Explain what steps you’ll take to avoid those same actions and how you’ll handle any similar incidents in the future. Anything else other than that will likely be met with a standard template or something along the lines of "I’m not satisfied with your request, declined." As ThatMontrealIP said, arbcom probably won’t entertain your case, so it would be a waste of time. Just to clarify, I’m not pointing fingers and saying you’re in the wrong, but trying to get your point across in the manner you currently are will not lead to a positive outcome. I hope this helps. – ².O.^Boxing 01:56, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Archiving

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

A bit of topic from what's going on above, but shouldn't the archiving be reduced to something like 1 time per month? Numerous discussions are being necessarily archived. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 11:46, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Berrely: I haven’t changed it. It was set that way to keep the page clean. I’m going to change it in a moment. Thank you for bringing that to my attention. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 11:50, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nick: - Thank you for pulling those out of archive and putting back on page. I didn’t want to break it so I’m glad you fixed it. Thankful as always Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 12:42, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I didn't want to pile on, and please don't treat the following as a warning, it's not. I'm telling you this purely for your own information.
You shouldn't remove any declined unblocks for active blocks (it's detailed at Wikipedia:User_pages#Ownership_and_editing_of_user_pages). We typically take any extended discussion concerning the unblock request to be part of the declined unblock, not just the template portion. A good rule of thumb would be to avoid removing anything from your talk page after the block notice is left. If you notice your auto-archiving has hidden something, we would hope you would restore it in a reasonable amount of time. The precise details aren't written down fully because blocks can often be complicated and there may be times when we would wish slightly different procedures or processes to be followed, such as when a checkuser is involved, or there is the oversight of sensitive information, but for most blocks, what I've said is typical procedure amongst the community. Nick (talk) 13:20, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I've put {{subst:dnau}} on the relevant sections, which should prevent them from being archived for a sufficiently long period of time. When you are unblocked, just remove the comments at the top of the sections and the bot'll archive them. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 15:20, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nick: & @AntiCompositeNumber: - Thank you both for those edits in helping fix and put the archives back on the page. I appreciate that and well have a cookie (you have to imagine it though) Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 17:27, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.