Jump to content

User talk:Dark Mistress

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from User talk:Lesbiangirl)

I have HTTP compression turned off completely, as well as any thing compressing my information over internet. As well, that Google thing that is disabled in Firefox. Also, disabled TRS 1.0 and 1.1, so that Only TRS 1.2 is on. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 21:36, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]


"So wide, so big and so large that it compromises its accuracy"- Comment I made back.

This below is a quite I found on DigitalDNA Games a comment on how to be successful. It made me laugh I almost stopped breathing. --Lesbiangirl (talk) 13:46, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"This is by far the most cynical and soulless viewpoint on game development I've ever read. Forget the creative process, forget innovation, forget your love of the craft, forget your dreams... and just cash in on the latest trends, quick, before you miss your opportunity. [language] He is a parasite that eats people's money and shits out other people's ideas. If that's the definition of success, then I don't want to be successful."




Hi there, I was really sad to see what you've written on your page about how you're feeling, it sounds really terrible. Have you thought about calling a crisis centre or helpline? There are several in various countries in the world: http://www.iasp.info/resources/Crisis_Centres . You're likely to get much better help from them than Wikipedia, as we're not professionals in this sort of thing. Whatever you do, I really hope you'll feel better soon! Heimstern Läufer (talk) 13:13, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can't, because... I don't want my parents knowing. Please tell me what this site is about, before I go there.... think you. If it does not request information, I will gladly use. --Lesbiangirl123 (talk) 13:18, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The site I linked to is a site that gives contact information for crisis centres or helplines that have people to help others who are considering suicide. I don't think it requires personal information, though I don't know much about it. Like others at Wikipedia, I'm not a professional at this sort of thing. I can only offer my sincere hope for you to feel better soon. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 13:44, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage protection done. Sysop only. Let me know if you need anything. You have my full support. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:37, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thinks. I wanted it done due to past reactions on various sites I go to. Since I'm not accepted at a lot of websites, I mostly go to lesbian related forums, and when I don't go to them, I get discriminated. Partly due to this, I am very reluctant to give anyone my real name. In fact, I haven't gave anyone my real name since 1999. I am kind of, ugh... pushy when anyone ask me of my sexual preferences. When someone ask, I never lie, but then... everyone knows, and of course the cycle of abuse. I am thinking of lying about it, but my parents told me to never lie about anything, so I have pretty much no choice. Since I don't have friends, what I'm telling on Wikipedia doesn't matter, as if I'm in a separate world of internet. Whereas the real world, I sit in my room all day... staring at the screen, reclusive... I'm very pretty, but I don't show anyone. I'm European , if anyone wants to know.. with some native American blood. --Lesbiangirl123 (talk) 07:09, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) I know some of what you are going through. I have no interest in your personal details, please tell me nothing. I have a tiny piece of advice for you because I am assuming you are living with parents and are quite youthful: Hang on! That is it, really. One day, if you allow yourself to, you will meet the person who will love you. In time you will allow yourself out to meet that person. College/university is a great time to reinvent yourself and to learn to cast your net where the right fish swim. I hope that doesn't sound patronising. To show you that I wish you well, perhaps my It Gets Better video might be of peripheral interest. Meanwhile I offer you such support as one can decently offer to a stranger in need. Fiddle Faddle 10:56, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I apologise if what I said offended you overly, and I'd just like to say I understand what you're going through (to some extent). There are loads of brilliant It gets better videos, though I'm sure Tim's is great (cant watch it right now). I think that one of the best is actually google/youtube's intro video (http://www.youtube.com/user/itgetsbetterproject?feature=watch), and the first responders ones are pretty good too. Also, try to be extra careful about posting personal information, or even better, dont post any :P at least until you're older. 152.78.249.33 (talk) 20:45, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The thing about the IGBP videos is that there is bound to be one that works for every individual. Me? I hate the corporate ones. I love those where individuals did them singly. Fiddle Faddle 22:30, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Message

[edit]

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at Anna Frodesiak's talk page. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:54, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Message

[edit]

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at Anna Frodesiak's talk page. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:10, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Automatic invitation to visit WP:Teahouse sent by HostBot

[edit]
Teahouse logo

Hi Lesbiangirl! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! SarahStierch (I'm a Teahouse host)

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:42, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment on the Manning RM

[edit]

Hi Lesbiangirl. I'm attending to the Requested Move in an administrative capacity, to try to keep things flowing smoothly and without undue fighting, and I'm concerned about the way you worded part of your oppose statement. You wrote in your oppose, "It is simple minded to really change gender 'just' because he said so." It seems from that sentence that you might be calling Manning "simple minded", which would be a problematic thing to say about a living person. I suspect you didn't intend it to sound like that, so would you mind trying to re-phrase that sentence to clarify it? If you did actually intend to communicate that you feel Manning is simple minded, though, please remove that part of the comment entirely, because name-calling isn't appropriate on Wikipedia, and in a very contentious topic area like this one it can cause substantial problems.. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 15:13, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did not call him simply minded; it was a general statement of who thought of that was. As well, since I don't want to get into a debate, I will leave my comment unmodified. I did not call anyone names. As well, I did not say Manning was that. I'm sorry if I'm hard to understand; my writing style is hard to read. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm busy with certain "personal" things. I probably won't come back for several days... It's my persona as I wish... --Lesbiangirl (talk) 18:59, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That unfunnny essay

[edit]

Please see Meta:Requests_for_deletion#Friends_of_gays_should_not_be_allowed_to_edit_articles which will soon be archived. Comparing that discussion with the two previous ones shows how far their world has moved on. I was under no illusions that it would be deleted, but we have made a few more people uneasy about heaping scorn on and cyberbullying of gay folk. Fiddle Faddle 17:21, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Test sig

[edit]

New Tech! --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 23:36, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dark Mistress. This new signature is almost invisible on my display, as is your entire user page! Maybe deep pink or fuchsia would be better. Or you could steal a little code from User:Blurred Lines: Dark Mistress -- Diannaa (talk) 15:52, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was stopping by to say the same thing - it is very hard to see on a white background, or the default "archived discussion" background colour. Of course it is up to you to design your signature as you please, but it would be nice to have something more easily readable. :) OrganicsLRO 09:28, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm leaving it as is, but think you anyway. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 11:07, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About Wikipedia Signatures, a guideline: ... and ensure that the end result is easily readable by virtually everybody. That is the point of the signature, not your social networking, but for others; please be courteous and make it readable. IP 65.128.121.29 (talk) 12:14, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are partially correct; I only really revert things, remove false information, and/or add minor things. I can't say I really take this site seriously; nor am I going to edit a lot. Since I barely have time, I only do so little; this is why I only do minor things. Anything to hard I ignore; likewise, I don't contribute to much. This is intended, and I make sure of that. Besides this, I am now ignoring everything on my talk page, I will not respond to comments; I am busy finishing my .gif that is about 5000 frames( each frame is a text character, and I must make it manually) which takes a lot of time. Just 5 hours creating 400 frames, and I have a lot more to go. So, do not be surprised if I don't respond to anymore comments made on my talk page, I am busy. Although I may, I cannot guarantee that... Also, I can see on my display just fine.. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 18:04, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Dark Mistress. Your signature is in violation of the guideline and three people have complained. The right thing for you to do is to change the signature, not blow it off by saying the site is unimportant to you or that you are too busy. Regards, -- Diannaa (talk) 19:20, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
is correct? (busy) --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 19:26, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Much better, I can see it fine now. Thank you, -- Diannaa (talk) 19:39, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question

[edit]

You reverted this edit, but provided no explanation in your edit summary as to why the redirect should have been reverted. May I ask why? Red Phoenix build the future...remember the past... 23:55, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I feel it shouldn't have been redirected, so I reverted it. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 23:57, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, but can you give an encyclopedic justification for such a move? The article lacks both sufficient coverage to assert notability and enough due weight to justify a full article; a mention in Sega Genesis is enough. As it stands, I don't see it ever having enough reliable sources and coverage to establish this. Red Phoenix build the future...remember the past... 00:19, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A separate article is fine. You just redirected without a valid reason. Also, Gens is notable, and I fail to understand a mention as enough. There is no information on it at the page you say is. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 00:22, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is established through reliable sources and real-world information and coverage (i.e. why is it notable as an emulator? What makes this project stand out? What kind of real-world coverage has there been about it?). As it stands, the article does not demonstrate any of these, which is likely why the article was tagged with a cleanup tag at its top some time ago. Instead, it reads more like an entry in a directory of what it is and what features it has (note: Wikipedia is not a directory). If you can prove me wrong, please feel free and I'll be glad, but if notability can't be established, a redirect would be a preferable solution. Red Phoenix build the future...remember the past... 00:43, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is more information on the Gens page then the article you want to redirect to. You are trowing up smoke and mirrors trying to have your way. I can give you more sources if you want, but just because there is no news lately does not make it non-notable. You misreported the polices and modify to have it your way, and I suggest you actually read them before trying to convince me otherwise. Also, there is no real world information, given that it is only offered as a download. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 00:47, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please show me where I'm misreading the policies if you believe that is the case, then. I haven't seen you make a case for retention of the article other than to simply state it's notable and to attack my interpretation of the policies. It is true that no news lately doesn't make it unnotable, but no significant reliable coverage at all does. Even if it's ten years old, if it's from a reliable source and says more than listing that it exists and a couple of directory-based facts, then that would be a source that asserts notability (WP:NTEMP). However, unless that can be shown at all, it's tough to see how this passes WP:GNG, which is the general guideline for notability on Wikipedia. Red Phoenix build the future...remember the past... 01:05, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The emulator is very old, and it has plenty of sources. Although there hasn't been any source for years, this is because emualtors generally don't get a lot of attention. Still, there are sources around that have established notability, and I find them to be acceptable. Although I'm not going to insert them right now, given that I'm to lazy to. The redirect is a one line sentence that doesn't explain anything about it. Can you explain how informative that is? I expect the answer to be no, it isn't. If I'm missing something, a one-line sentence fails to explain anything. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 01:10, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The redirect notes it exists; if you prefer, List of video game emulators may be a better redirect if you find it more helpful. However, informativeness of the article really has little to do with its notability and due weight; some things are simply not meant to have articles. According to WP:NOTDIR, "However, Wikipedia is not a directory of everything in the universe that exists or has existed." If the topic is not notable, there doesn't need to be information about it if it does not have notability independent of the subject, and not inherited by the notability of Sega Genesis (i.e. just because it's an emulation of a major console doesn't mean it's notable in its own right on that fact alone). Despite our disagreement on this matter, I'm not entirely unreasonable. If you have sources that you believe establish notability, I will be more than glad to give you time to add them and make improvements to the article to bring it to a reasonable quality standard. In fact, let's call it a week, shall we? I will watch list the page to monitor progress, and if insignificant progress is made in a week, I will seek to open a redirect discussion and establish consensus for one. I would call this a reasonable compromise for the time being to determine whether or not said notability can be established. Red Phoenix build the future...remember the past... 01:40, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Once again, you fail to say why it fails notability. Say if I'm wrong, but it appears you are saying that if there is no sources on the news, then must delete. In other words, from your posts it appears you say just because it doesn't have sources from news, it isn't notable. I'm sorry if that's what I'm getting, but it seems that way. Ether way, it already has sources, including a Google books. What more do you need? --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 01:45, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's not exactly what is meant, but there a little bit of validity in that statement. It's not so much that the news is the ultimate determining factor, because it is not; it's coverage in reliable sources that establishes notability. My challenge to this article is that it does not meet the general notability guideline due to a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. Now, to help you see what I am seeing, I've conducted a source review, as I would for a WP:FAC during the times I choose to contribute to those discussions. The article, as it stands, has three sources listed.
  • Of them, segaretro.org is not a reliable source because it is user-contributed and does not have a reputation for fact-checking (no user-contributed sites do). (Quote from WP:GNG: "Reliable" means sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media, and in any language. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability.)
  • I have opened and read the book linked; little more is present than a mention that the emulator exists and that it is a good choice for playing Genesis games. This is not significant coverage. (Quote from WP:GNG: "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a passing mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material.) (In other words, it's fine if a source isn't about the emulator itself, but there has to be coverage that directly addresses the topic, not just a passing mention as is present in the book).
  • Now, the Retro Gamer article is your best bet, as I have not yet thumbed through that. However, given that the most used here is that Retro Gamer called it the best emulator for the Genesis is another example of an issue of lack of significant coverage. It's my thought that because of its usage here, it is merely a passing mention and the article has no section on significant coverage on Gens. Even if it did, however, a single source alone is not enough to establish notability (Quote from WP:GNG: "Sources" should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected.)
I hope this has helped to clarify things. I don't mean to impose with this question, but might you be a newer editor to Wikipedia? In which case, welcome aboard; I hope you enjoy the project. I'm hoping this step-by-step demonstration of the general notability guideline can help you to see how notability is evaluated. Red Phoenix build the future...remember the past... 02:04, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I realized this just now. Now that I've searched it, I cannot find any source... at all. Not even the pages it links to show up ether... I agree. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 02:10, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's all right; I always appreciate the chance for a discussion, and while I was concerned this may get out of hand with the "smoke and mirrors" comment, you kept a civil head and stuck to your points with respect. That I can appreciate, and if you'd like, I'd be glad to lend you my assistance if you ever feel you need it. Thank you, Red Phoenix build the future...remember the past... 02:14, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Civility Barnstar
I'm really sorry you got bitten by this edit. I really wish something could be done to stop this happening on Wikipedia. You did a great job trying to inject some peace and civility into the situation, and I thought Eric's response was appalling. StAnselm (talk) 01:10, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your commentary

[edit]

I hope you mean to keep your word. Nothing good can come from those patronizing comments on the talk page of a longtime editor--they could well be considered WP:BAITING. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 01:29, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

He needs to be blocked; this kind behavior is not good. I would block him if I was an admin, I was just trying to get it through. Of course, it is predicable response however.. -Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 01:37, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm trying to read your user page, but it's not WP:COLOR compliant so I'm having a hard time. What I do know is that you have 25 edits in article space. You're not an admin, and I'm not Eric--but if I were Eric I would also be pissed if such an inexperienced editor, who is clearly not aware of something that's been going on for quite some time, came sticking their nose in some business that doesn't concern them at all. You are free to speak your mind on a noticeboard or whatever, but why on earth would you go to the talk page of an editor who's been here for years, has almost two hundred thousand article edits, and probably more FAs and GAs than you have edits in mainspace, and tell them how to behave? Drmies (talk) 01:43, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And now this? Let me point you to WP:BRD. And WP:EW. Drmies (talk) 01:45, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That wasn't an edit war, given that I only reverted once. Also, I have been here far longer on Wikipedia then you think, given that I edited on IP addresses since 2008. I'm going to bed however, so I'll come back later. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 01:48, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, you reverted twice. I don't see any reason to believe you've been here longer, but that's immaterial I suppose. Drmies (talk) 01:50, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted only once, given that the redirect was October 3. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 01:51, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also, now that I've tried to find the sources, I say it is not notable. I admit I didn't actually try to find sources until now, but now that I've searched, I can't find anything really.. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 02:12, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
How can anyone possibly be accused of baiting Eric? His own behaviour is so utterly beyond the pale that any response to it is made reasonable in comparison. If he wants to, and bizarrely has been allowed to, opt out of WP:CIVIL, then that cuts both ways. We can no longer expect or demand any respect or deference to him from other editors, given the way he chooses to behave himself.
The attitude "Eric is the only editor capable of stringing a sentence together, we are lost without him" is pernicious nonsense. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:04, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to see that you got stomped on and bitten for behaving like a civilised human being. Have some pie.

Dark Mistress, I take your word for it that you've been around for a while, and I'm glad you created an account; whatever your statement above that you don't take this site very seriously, creating an account shows in my book that you are making a commitment to help improve the encyclopedia. Also, that's what you were claiming to have to heart in this comment at AN. However, that is a very serious and very nasty accusation to make about any editor. Imagine if someone said that about you. I think you owe it to everyone there to either support that - with more than two diffs showing Eric using 4-letter words - or to retract it. If Eric has made you feel bad, I am sorry. (Although if it was just for appearing on his talk page telling him he's a bad person, please take it as a lesson. I see you here on your talk page telling people not to bother you with niceties such as your signature - which thank you for fixing! - please consider that others feel similarly.) But assessments about whether someone is a net loss require a careful examination of their edit history, and Eric's contains a lot of hard and good work for this site. More than mine by some metrics, and I'm an admin. Please consider, if you wish to post to central noticeboards, thinking your position through more carefully and presenting it more judiciously; we also have a policy against personal attacks, and you're veering toward that with the force in which you are stating your position about the one against incivility. Thanks for listening and considering. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:58, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know if that was an attack, but I wouldn't give him anything less. I tried to tell him to calm down on his talk page, but it obviously wasn't going anywhere so I stopped. He also dismissed me here http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eric_Corbett&diff=next&oldid=579192569 and I'm not sure what to do. I ask you however to explain what to do, because I didn't understand the comment you posted(I don't mean to be rude) --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 21:05, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you had had a previous interaction with Eric in which he was nasty to you, then I'm very sorry. But what I see on his talkpage is you walking in and imposing your personal standard of never using profanity. I'm afraid that's just not the way the world works or even what the civility policy is meant for. Dressing someone down simply and solely for using profanity is, in fact, not very civil. We have a civility policy because we are working together. It's an issue of respect; I'm sure you agree. Part of respect is wording; but part of it is also not injecting oneself into issues and lecturing people on things that are not one's business. You may privately hold the opinion that anyone who says "fuck" on Wikipedia is contemptible. That's your privilege. You can even choose to avoid working with such editors - it's a big project. You also have the right to complain if they tell you to "fuck off" during a discussion. But for you to go to someone's talk page simply to tell them to stop using cursewords is not very respectful of them; it's counterproductive. And if that's your basis for judging someone as doing more harm than good around here, then your short-sighted emphasis on bad words is causing you to be extremely disrespectful. Especially in a block/unblock discussion on a central noticeboard. And that's bad for the project - which is about people working together. Please dial it back. You have one interpretation of the civility policy - fine, you have expressed it. Yes, the civility policy is important. But so are other things, including respect, which is the reason behind the civility policy. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:21, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea what to do anymore. That's all I can think of. I admit it's not clear what exactly I'm doing. In any case, I rest the case; I'm distancing myself from this. Altas, I have nothing left to say. That's all really, and I will come back tomorrow(although I may or may not)About the respect thing, I don't know. Maybe if I wasn't instantly blown off trying to help? But his actions were rude, and I don't think it matters how long anyone stays on Wikipedia. It's already caused some to quit, and I am withholding my true thoughts, because it is far more... you know, then is allowed. But to spell an end to the debate, I am ceasing to comment about it. I cannot guarantee if I'll respond, but it's not going to be today. Certainly, yours truly... unknown.--Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 21:32, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Understood; I have stuff I need to write! But I admit I genuinely don't understand why you took it upon yourself to give him advice, or why you were determined to take part at AN. As I've said, maybe there's history between you that I'm not aware of. For what it's worth, while I am aware of editors who have been driven away from Wikipedia by rudeness, I don't know of any driven away by Eric or by any other editor who uses curse words. But of course we're rarely going to know why someone leaves, and you may be aware of examples I am not aware of. Sleep well! Yngvadottir (talk) 22:11, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seaman Ohio - WP:COATRACK

[edit]

Please~justify your reversion by stating your case on the talk page why the article about a ship should have 5 times as much content about a law enforcement action than it does about the supposed subject of the article, the ship. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:29, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because otherwise the article is very very small. I think the problem is not enough content, and it's the only option we have left really... I'm out of ideas... --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 12:32, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk Hi, I noticed that you undid the major content deletions [1] from the MV Seaman Guard Ohio page by a user called TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom. You are the second person after Mark Arsten (talk) to have undid the disruptive deletions by TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom.
The deletions are the latest actions to cause disruption to the page by TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom were done with total disregard and contrary to the comments left by several users on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MV Seaman Guard Ohio incident. Earlier, he resorted to inserting multiple service/administration tags to make the layout totally incongruous. I thought that you may want to be aware of the discussions both on the TALK page Talk:MV Seaman Guard Ohio of the article as well as to the majority "KEEP" vote with regard to the content on the AfD page.
Have a nice day ! 81.240.147.56 (talk) 13:19, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dark Mistress: I was coming here to talk to you about your edits at WP:Administrators' Noticeboard concerning Eric Corbett. But then I saw this so I'll comment on this first. There is no minimum length for an article, so inclusion of the material on the incident at full length in the ship article is really not justifiable to remedy article shortness. It belongs in an article on the company, IMO, and I'll deal with that if no one else does first. But please, don't pad articles out just because they look short. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:40, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, I do know however is that without the information, it's not notable. Also, the incident should not be ported to the company, as all ships with incidents should remain on the ships page. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 20:52, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The article survived AfD, so the community disagrees with you on the first point. On the second, I disagree with you, but perhaps not too radically - the incident deserves a brief summary at the ship article, yes. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:01, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ah well, interesting. Another article with a history (and an AfD, and talk page discussion) that the Dark Mistress seems to have had no idea about, with a massive revert not based on any kind of policy except for "it looked short" (TWSS). And then she goes and reverts again, with no sensible reason whatsoever. "Without the information, it's not notable"--well, that's what you say, but you could try reading the AfD, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MV Seaman Guard Ohio incident. Sorry, but this is getting repetitive and a tad disruptive. Drmies (talk) 00:13, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I only revered twice. But I stopped due to getting that way. Anyway, it's up to them to decide. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 10:57, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stop stalking/hounding me. It is clear that you are, as shown here, here (also about the Hakeem Noor-ud-Din article, but now WP:Oversighted as a result of the oversighting obviously being a focus of something unrelated, but where you admitted that you had looked at my contributions), here, here (where you likely made things worse), and now here. I'm also sure that you followed me to the Lesbian article after reading the post on my talk page about it. But as is noted at the Lesbian talk page, I don't want a thing to do with you. I have not read your latest email to me either. I have not read either of your emails to me. Realize that, whether you are "helping" me or arguing against what I have argued, I do not want to interact with you in the least. So stop seeking interaction with me. If you continue to do so, I will report you at WP:ANI. If you are going to follow me, which you will obviously keep doing, then at least not be so tempted to comment in whatever discussion I'm partaking in. I also do not care to hear about these matters from any "I'm protective of Dark Mistress" talk page stalker you may have acquired during the concerning posts (now WP:Oversighted) you initially made on your user page. What I most care about with regard to you is that you stay away from me when it is quite easy to do so. Flyer22 (talk) 13:14, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that bad, but I'll give you a hint. Why should I listen to you if every time I comment your page, you ignore me? I know what you mean, but every comment I posted so far on yours is promptly deleted. What is clear is that I'm trying to get my message to you, and yet every singly time it's deleted. Where does it stop? So, as you already aware, I sort of stalked you... however, it's clear it is doing more harm then good, so I'll stop (but I must disclose I'll probably continue to follow your posts if it interest me) and.. and... I'm not sure. But as I've said before, I'll settle for peace.
Also, the reason I'm following your posts is... because I've got nobody else to. Really. I do like the same subjects you like; but unlike you, I don't know where to start. So I then follow you around, and I don't mean to be that way, but it is literally because I have nothing else to follow. I'm not sure if that's OK, but that is the way I am. I'm not sure, but maybe I'll stop talking on talk pages to you specifically, but I... if you need more information, care to explain more, because that's all I have left in my thoughts. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 17:53, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: If you really want me to stop stalking you, then I will stop, effective immeidantly. I will try to avoid talk pages with you. I will now start, effective today, to disconatue talking with you, on talk pages... however, I'm not sure to apply this to articlespace. Waiting for your reply --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 18:05, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to WP:Hounding me (and it is WP:Hounding because I do not appreciate your participation when you comment in a discussion you have followed me to; it aggravates and is "that bad" to me), it is not about listening to me; it's about listening (deferring) to the WP:Hounding policy. And if "every comment [you] posted so far on [my talk page] is promptly deleted," these comments would have been deleted as well. You cannot force me to acknowledge and/or interact with you (though, judging by this section on your talk page, you can quite obviously drive me to acknowledge/interact with you), and you need to stop trying to force me to do so. I remove, from my talk page, your posts that are combative; I do that because there's the fact that I do not want to interact with you and your combative posts make the matter worse. Even if you leave posts that are not combative, I do not want to "hear" from/interact with you unless I "have to." As for not having "nobody else," there are plenty of people you could follow around and you should not be looking to follow anyone around unless that person is a vandal and/or otherwise edits unconstructively. Or unless you are on friendly terms with that person and he or she does not care if you follow them. You certainly don't need to follow one person around to learn the ropes of editing Wikipedia. As for stating that you will stay away from me: You always come back to reply again when you state that you are done replying. And despite agreeing at the Lesbian article that it would be best if we stay away from each other, you continued following me to other articles and weighing in on matters/discussions that I'm involved in. So it should not come as a surprise to you (or anyone reading this discussion) that I do not take your vow to stay away this time as credible. Flyer22 (talk) 21:15, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(EDIT CONFLICT) Despite this, if you do want me to go away, I will stop... and I'm sorry, but you are interesting... you.. kind of to interesting. If you hadn't noticed, I haven't posted and or followed you since, but I have nothing left to say. What more do you want now? You made me feel bad, I however don't have nothing left... --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 21:30, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also, how long are you going to continue to post, as I'm busy building up my User page. I got the point; but I to want fairness; if I can't post your page, I could have easily forbid you as well. I wait for the reply, and despite the short time I have left, I am going to bed soon, in about an hour so I'll wait the responses by then. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 21:38, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Now I know why. But we have free images available, then the non-free is not needed. Still, I'm going to bed soon. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 22:16, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
More of the same here, here, here, here and here. Oh well. You were warned. Keep that type of editing up, and it shouldn't be long before I take you to WP:ANI. And as for posting to each other's talk pages, I would not "have to" post to your talk page if you would leave me alone. I already made clear the matter above. There is no free version of the image from The Puppy Episode you have twice removed from the Lesbian article. And we use WP:Non free images when there is no free alternative of the same material (one case where we cannot use non-free images at all is to present living people in the infobox). However, I am not about to give you a full lesson in WP:Non-free. You would also do well to not assume that I like editing any topic at this site. I mostly edit at this site because much of this site is in such terrible shape. Flyer22 (talk) 22:38, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The vagina was tweaked slightly, I can't edit articles you edited? As for editing your talk page, that's because they were vandalism. I will however remove the image again if you do it again, as it is completely unrelated. Also, I went back to the lesbian article to remove the image, that has nothing to do with you. The non-free content policy states that no image should be inserted if it is unrelated to the article, which in this case is unrelated to lesbian. The image has nothing to do with it, it does not enhance the article in any way. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 22:44, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All of the edits I pointed out in my 22:38, 30 October 2013 reply are WP:HOUNDING! All of them! And you are wrong about the Ellen image for reasons made clear by the Keep comments in the current deletion debate discussion and in the previous deletion debate discussion about that image. You have so many WP:Competence issues with regard to editing Wikipedia that I'm surprised you've lasted this long at this site. End of. Flyer22 (talk) 22:53, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No they are not, the vagina edit had nothing to do with you. I improved it by removing small piece of text. I will still remove the non-free image, because it does not belong in the lesbian article, and we have plenty of free content available. I was tempted to remove it from the others, but I didn't because it was related to it. Not so with the lesbian article, which is why it should not be there. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 22:58, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kristin

[edit]

Should we call you John254, Kristen Eriksen, Chester Markel or something different this go around? OSTheRobot (talk) 19:01, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea who are they. It appears that I'm being stalked! Oh, but I do not care. I suggest you forever stay off my page. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 19:04, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Harassment

[edit]

Dark Mistress, you must cease your harassment of Flyer22 immediately. As seen in the discussion above, you are even aware that you're doing it. Stop. Flyer told you in this edit not to edit her User Talk page, you need to stop doing it, even if you see vandalism there. Don't follow her to article pages. Wikipedia's policy regarding harassment is here, please familiarize yourself with it. Zad68 03:16, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I already stopped. However, Flyer22 still reverted both edits and you suggest I not revert them? If that's the case, then I don't know what to do. I'm still complicating removing the information on the vagina article however. (I'm talking on the lesbian and vagina article, not the talk page) --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 15:01, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you've stopped, fantastic, that's very much appreciated.

At Vagina you've only made one edit and so it seems like it'd be easy to just disengage there. At Lesbian, it's difficult for me to comment, as I am involved in editing that content along with you and Flyer, but it does look like you've been involved in only two points of discussion there. Your comments regarding the Guttmacher source indicate that you accept the discusion has been resolved. The Ellen image is being discussed at the appropriate NFCC venue. I can't tell you what to do here, but if I were you it'd seem like a good idea just to let that discussion finish running its course and let the implementation of the consensus result stand, and move on. From your User page it looks like you have expertise in technical areas, consider focusing your energies there. Based on your comments and edit summaries, I'm afraid if you keep editing in the area you have been, you will rather quickly be taken (by someone uninvolved, not me) to an administrator noticeboard for a discussion that won't end well. Zad68 15:25, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what quite to do. I am stopping that Ellen edit war, I'll let it run--Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 15:30, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinitely blocked

[edit]

You have already been warned for harassment and disruptive editing, which for a user with so few edits would be problematic enough on its own. However, in addition, after joining Wikipedia you (i) immediately injected yourself into Wikipedia's most problematic topic areas, (ii) participated in internal noticeboards that most new editors do not find, and (iii) exhibited a clear familiarity with Wikipedia's operations. As a result, I find it adequately probable that you are a returning user who has not been forthcoming about their true identity and past accounts, and I have therefore indefinitely revoked your editing rights on this project. I suggest you contact the Ban Appeals Subcommittee if you wish to disclose your previous accounts to the Wikipedia community without doing so publicly. AGK [•] 21:21, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why have I been blocked? I have not been here only been on past IP addresses? I request you to unblock me, as I have not made a previous account. I have not made disruptive editing in the past few days. I also stopped that already. Where is the disruptive editing? --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 21:39, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
EDIT: also, I'll go to that page, but since my IP range is pretty wide, being on multiple ranges, I can only say that it is ATMC. I have never created an account as I've said before, but I was active on IP addresses before. My IP changes fast however, such as in the past few minutes I just changed it. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 21:49, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
May I give you some advice, please? We have spoken slightly before, but hardly interacted, if at all, so I wonder if you would take some advice from me nonetheless?
The advice is this
  1. look back over your past behaviour here, and acknowledge, certainly to yourself, where you have made disruptive edits.
  2. look back at your interactions with the editor who has asked you more than once to step away from their talk page, and consider the actions you need to apologise for. Even of it does not lead to your being unblocked, make a good, genuine and unforced apology here.
  3. commit to making no further disruptive edits and no further edits (etc) that could be perceived as harassment
Even if you do all of this you may not achieve being unblocked, because that gift simply may not be granted to you by those who are able to grant it. You are more likely to achieve being unblocked by being genuinely humble and contrite than by any other actions. Fiddle Faddle 21:53, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I acknowledge it was disruptive, but I stopped. I stopped the harassing her, I stopped edit warring I.. I was wrong. I am sorry... I will tell you however I am autistic, but that is not an excuse for my actions. I am genuinely sorry. I would like to edit the GPU related articles and Tech related, to fix the problems with them like I did at Realtek. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 21:57, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is very little you can do now except wait, I think. This is not my area. I am deliberately not an administrator here. I do know that every genuine editor has the right to appeal things like this, but I haven't the slightest idea how to do it because I've never got into situations like that. Fiddle Faddle 22:05, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am not an administrator either. Wikipedia:Appealing a block says that "Instructions for requesting an unblock will be placed on your talk page or in the block explanation" but the only thing the blocking administrator mentioned was WP:BASC. You will need to appeal the block, in which it will be very important to acknowledge wrongdoing and promise not to do it again - as you have above. The instructions for doing so are at Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks - you need to put {{unblock|1=Insert your reason to be unblocked here}} at the bottom of this page. StAnselm (talk) 22:29, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To add to this, please take your time. You need to make your case well, quietly and calmly. It must be in your own words because you must mean every word. That means that no-one can help you to word it. If you mean it then request an unblock. If you do not mean it then please simply walk away. There is absolutely no guarantee that your request will be granted, but a full apology and an acknowledgement of what you have done, plus a sincere promise not to do it again and to comply with any special terms of being unblocked is important.
Editors do not often get second chances. Do not blow it. Fiddle Faddle 22:38, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll appeal tomorrow. The reason I'm not now is that I'm tired. I will also cool down as well. I will appeal for tomorrow. I kindly hope you wait. Good night... --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 22:55, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is absolutely no rush. Tomorrow, or the day after, or the week after that is fine. Take all the time you need, and create the best appeal you can. Then look at it, re-read it, and make sure it says what you want and in the tone that is most useful. And only submit it when you are ready. And please remember, there is no guarantee of it succeeding. Fiddle Faddle 23:03, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry if I removed your post, but I deleted the IP comment as it kind of hurt my feelings.. since you replied afterwords, I had to remove yours as well. Anyway, it was distracting me from posting further detail, as it was very mean and... to put it shortly, hateful post the IP address posted. So I removed the post, in order to not get worked up on that comment. I did not mean to censor comments, but as it is my talk page I believe I have a right to delete comments which hurt my feelings. I hope I didn't break any rules, I'm sorry if I did. Anyway, shortly after this I am modifying my appeal... be back, modifying it. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 16:06, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am certain that it hurt your feelings. It appeared to me to be spiteful and not required. You have a perfect right to edit things from your talk page that you do not wish to see, and I understand completely that my post after that message went as well. I wanted to remove that message from the IP editor myself, but I also do not feel I am entitled to censor your talk page. If you look at my own talk page you will see a notice at the top about personal attacks. I have a very thick skin! No amount of rudeness or unpleasant words can ever hurt me. I laugh in the cafe of personal attacks and I spit into their eye!
Regarding your unblock request, I am glad it was successful. I was not sure it would succeed. You have now met a very careful administrator who has presented you with some very strict conditions. Please do not let their faith in you down. If on doubt about any matter do not act, but place the question on YOUR talk page, and then ask them on theirs to visit your own talk page to discuss the matter. That will be safest since you are discouraged from posting on talk pages.
I will also offer you any advice I am able. You are welcome on my talk page, though obviously need to honour the terms of your unblocking, so I suggest you treat me in the same manner. Put the question you would like to have answered HERE, and then ask me on my talk page if I would come and answer your question. Fiddle Faddle 00:51, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

reasons....

[edit]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Dark Mistress (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

I was blocked for my past edits a couple of days ago - I know I was disruptive in the past, but I stopped these edits of stalking her. I know I was in the wrong, but I ceased doing those things for several days now. I mostly now edit tech related articles, as you see in my edits recently. I am not a "sock puppet", nor was any evidence was presented of me being one. I admit I was wrong, I make mistakes sometimes... but to block me indef is kind of discouraging... I sort of understand why I was blocked. I am not a sock puppet. I have been on Wikipedia since 2008, although I only recently made an account. I cannot give any proof of that however. My internet provider, ATMC, makes me get a new IP fast, but that's doesn't matter. I promise I won't make any disruptive edits anymore, nor personal attacks or harassment. I stopped bothering Flyer22 for the past days, I appoligise to you Flyer22 for that. I am sorry for being disruptive , I hope you understand. I am not new, as I've said before. I'm sorry for all of this, I really am. Let me explain. I'm just a woman, 19 about to be 20, and I have personality disorder. It does not matter however, ADHD is the thing in question. I'm sorry for this... I am going to stop going to the noticeboard as well, and only really edit the articles now. I hope you really understand this text I just typed, I am really sincere... and I promise not to do the things I did in the past. : I... really have nothing left to say. My sincere apology... I will now post a restriction; I will cease going to the noticeboards, and only really edit articles that interest me. I will try to stop posting on talk pages as well. Far an away I am... i...i.. don't know what else to do except wait. I'm keeping up this page for now, in order to wait. Signed... yours truly, --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 00:59, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Conditional unblock, with the editing restrictions detailed below, including a 1RR restriction, a restriction from editing certain Wikipedia namespaces, advice to avoid the user talkspace, and a warning about further stalking of other editors and disruptive editing, eligible for appeal in 6 months. ~Adjwilley (talk) 22:00, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock offer

[edit]

Hi, Dark Mistress, I have had a chance to review many of your edits and interactions with other editors, and I am willing to extend a conditional unblock offer. It looks to me like you are editing in good faith, but it seems as though there is a problem with you being disruptive while trying to help. (Note: please don't be offended by my linking of the CIR essay: it's not an attack on your intelligence or abilities, but an observation of your interpersonal interactions.) Additionally, in reviewing your edits, it looks like of the 257 edits you've made so far, 56 are to the article space, 49 are to the Wikipedia/WPtalk space, and 91 are to the User talk space. Of your article edits, many are reverts of others' edits and removals of material. Our primary purpose here is to build an encyclopedia, and as far as I can see, your participation here thus far has not done much to further that goal. That said, here are my conditions. If unblocked:

  • You will abide strictly to WP:0RR. This means that you will not revert or undo any edits by other editors, period. Exceptions to this, such as making reverts on your own talk page, are listed at WP:3RR, but I advise you to be very careful with the "vandalism" and "BLP" exceptions. In other words, you are allowed to revert obvious vandalism, but I advise against it because you can get into trouble for mistakenly labeling good edits as vandalism.
  • You will be banned from making edits to the Wikipedia and Wikipedia talk namespaces. The two exceptions to this are that you may file reports at WP:AIV and WP:RPP. You may not post at WP:AN/I, WP:AN, etc. If you need help with something, contact an administrator or use the {{help}} template on your talk page.
  • You will be discouraged, but not banned, from editing User talk pages, other than your own. However, any evidence of stalking or badgering will be frowned upon.
  • Any administrator may sanction you (including restoring the indefinite block) for violation of these restrictions.
  • You may appeal these restrictions in 6 months to myself or another administrator. If at that time you have a history of constructive editing, avoiding conflict and disruption, these restrictions may be removed completely.

As you can see, my conditions are very strict, but they are the best path forward that I can see. I am open to discussing them with you before you make a decision. Also, if you would rather not accept these restrictions, you don't have to, and are welcome to wait for another admin to come along to accept or deny your request for unblock. ~Adjwilley (talk) 20:01, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I accept not editing the Wikipedia: related pages, I won't revert more then once anymore articles, and I will abide by your rules. I am sorry for earlier things I did. I think I understand these things. I accept. EDIT: Can I however paterciapte in the AFD on XAudio2 page? I would like that expection please. I find that notable. If however you won't allow it, I understand. Again, I would accept any restrctions... I understand. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 20:31, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You can edit at AFD, and I can add that to the conditions above. I think you might have misunderstood the 0RR condition. That means Zero reverts. You can't use the revert or undo button at all. If you think that is too strict, I can modify it to WP:1RR if you will agree to voluntarily try to abide by 0RR. (This would basically make it so you don't accidentally break the rule and get yourself blocked.) ~Adjwilley (talk) 21:16, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
alright. I agree to no reverts. I don't think that's to strict. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 21:19, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Conditions for unblock

[edit]

OK, I will unblock you with the following conditions and editing restrictions:

  • You will abide strictly to WP:1RR. Furthermore, you agree to try to abide by a voluntary WP:0RR, which means avoiding using the "revert" or "undo" button at all. Exceptions to this, such as making reverts on your own talk page, are listed at WP:3RR, but I advise you to be very careful with the "vandalism" and "BLP" exceptions. In other words, you are allowed to revert obvious vandalism, but I advise against it because you can get into trouble for mistakenly labeling good edits as vandalism.
  • You will be banned from making edits to the Wikipedia and Wikipedia talk namespaces. The two exceptions to this are that you may file reports at WP:AIV and WP:RPP, and vote at WP:AfD. You may not, however, post at WP:AN/I, WP:AN, etc. If you need help with something, contact an administrator or use the {{help}} template on your talk page.
  • You will be discouraged, but not banned, from editing User talk pages, other than your own. However, any evidence of stalking or badgering will be frowned upon.
  • Any administrator may sanction you (including restoring the indefinite block) for violation of these restrictions.
  • You may appeal these restrictions in 6 months to myself or another administrator. If at that time you have a history of constructive editing, avoiding conflict and disruption, these restrictions may be removed completely.

~Adjwilley (talk) 22:00, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK I accept. I'll comply. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 22:02, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and good luck editing. It looks like a number of people have given you some good advice above. If you need any help, feel free to contact me. I'll keep this page on my watchlist for a while. ~Adjwilley (talk) 22:08, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Can I edit the XAudio2 afd? I am asking this because I'm scared to. Also, I am going to bed for the day. I think you. Good night Adjwilley... --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 22:12, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the conditions above specifically say you can vote at AfD. I'm glad you're asking when you don't understand something. Best to play it on the safe side. ~Adjwilley (talk) 23:24, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Your best bet, of course, is to find an interesting topic area (preferably one with a family of friendly editors), look up some references and facts, and start adding them to articles. For example, there are thousands of stub articles that need more content. In some parts of Wikipedia, the editing community is focussed around WikiProjects. But adding references and facts to article is what Wikipedia editing is primarily about. Happy editing! -- 101.119.15.86 (talk) 01:10, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to try to improve the XAudio2 article, I'm back from sleeping as I'm restless for the time being. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 01:58, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea. It badly needs reliable sources. I've added one. -- 101.119.14.241 (talk) 02:25, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disappointing edit

[edit]

DM, I was disappointed to see this edit to Vagina. In addition to introducing a factually incorrect claim, that edit largely redid a change you made previously that was reverted by Flyer22—it reinstated your challenge to the number of functions. It could be seen as a revert. It also appears to be re-engaging in an area with Flyer. Please think very carefully about the previous discussions and events here before proceeding. Zad68 22:28, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I reworded it, tried to correct; on the second area, I reverted nonsense added(flyer22 hasn't even edit that page) so no I'm not trying to engage her. But I don't see my edit a revert, as my previous edit removed it altogether, whereas the edit I made an hour ago was to try to reword it.
Wait.. what I mean is I'm not trying to confront her. I was looking at videos game and woman, then to woman, then to sexual articles. But as I've said before, I didn't mean to mess up the article - I'm not perfect. I hope I'm clear, but that is not a revert in any way other then maybe functions number. I don't view it as false ether, as the vagina is a urinary opening ( to let urine pass out) and sexual intercourse and childbirth are other functions. I hope that clears it out, on the the other article of three edits, I noticed vandalism that went unnoticed for 5 days, so I corrected that. Flyer22 has not edited that article for the entire history as far as I can see, so I only really made one edit that is possibly engaging, but I didn't mean it to be that way. I'm sorry if I did anything wrong.
I will like for you to wait for my reply - going to bed. I repeat - I'm sorry... I can't really say anything more however(I May comment sooner then tomorrow!) but I may edit sexual related articles, and I don't see any problem with that ether. Just because she may edit sexual articles doesn't mean I cannot. I hope you will believe me. Now if you'll exuse me, I'll take a short break off this site for now. I may respond tomorrow, but I cannot guarantee it - I need time to cool down. As such, further information can only be done via e-mailing me. I can give a full detail of my life via that venue, as some of it is to private to talk here or anywhere else on the internet. It is however kind of scary information, perhaps a bit to frightening - I doubt you'll really want to know.. why. Since then, I'm taking a couple of days off of editing articles for now until we can sort out what I can and can't do - I will appreciate if you make that clear. I will stay here until we get that clear, understand? I.. would like to spell an end to the debate - it gets me worked up to much. I...i..i.. don't know what to do? What do I do, where do I go? How do I edit the site acceptably? How? Why? These are questions that are quite frankly important. I will appreciate your insights...--Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 22:41, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a little confused by the longish response...I'm not seeing a debate, and I don't think it's anything worth getting worked up about. In the case of this edit, I suggest that you move on. (Though I'm not female and I don't have an in depth understanding of anatomy, I think you are wrong on this point...urine comes out the urethra, which AFAIK, is different. I'm really out of my league here though, and I have no desire to discuss it further. A short break might be good for you - in fact, a good idea might be to reflect on why you want to edit this site (not saying you can't, but what's in it for you if it's causing you so much stress). ~Adjwilley (talk) 00:07, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also noticing that you seem to be mostly removing text from article rather than adding text. A good way of contributing may be: (1) to get a book on an interesting subject; (2) to add information, based on the book (though without plagiarism) to the relevant articles; and (3) to add proper references with page numbers, as was done in XAudio2. Everyone will be happy if you operate that way. -- 101.119.14.67 (talk) 00:14, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, I would be much more happy that way. Thanks 101, great advice. ~Adjwilley (talk) 01:09, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try. But not now, going to bed. I'll try tomorrow... For now, I'll think of what to do. Good night everyone... --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 01:12, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
DM, you were blocked in part for your involvement in contentious areas, in your unblock request you acknowledge your stalking behavior was disruptive, and as part of your unblock condition you agreed try to stick to 0RR. In the edit I called disappointing, you changed a contentious article to restore—at least in part—something you did that was reverted by the one you were stalking. When you're given a second chance to keep editing after an indef block, the path to success is to avoid the problematic areas and behavior that led up to the block, and not to test the boundaries of your editing restrictions, just days into them. That was the whole point to my message, really. I think the advice you've been given to move on and pick up editing in the area the IP points out is good advice. Zad68 04:12, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. Since it's late, going to bed for real this time... after I read the ps4 article. I'm moving on...--Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 04:23, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sexual objectification, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Breast enlargement (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A suggestion

[edit]

In order to avoid even the smallest chance of an accusation that you are reverting edits when a part of your unblock permissions restricts your ability to revert edits, I have a suggestion for you to consider.

I suggest you do your very best to avoid removing material from articles for the moment unless improving the prior material by replacing the material with other, fully cited material. If you see the need to just remove material I suggest you take the extra step of discussing it on the article's talk page to give others a chance to comment. In that way it is less likely that anyone might accuse you of breaking your unblock conditions.

An example might be: "I consider the following wording [quote the wording] to be poor for the following reasons [give reasons] , and would value your opinions. My intention is to remove it/replace it with [these words] sometime on or after [date], but I would value your input before I do so."

If there is substantial input that opposes your proposed change please walk away, especially if you are 100% certain that you are correct. We do not act well when we are sure we are right.

The reason I suggest this is because your unblock conditions are very restrictive. I would hate you to be indefinitely blocked by accident.

You are free to accept or reject my suggestion, but I ask you to consider it carefully. Fiddle Faddle 09:38, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I just woke up. Now that I just had some sleep, I'll start anew today. Thinks anyway I'll listen.... --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 12:22, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have some understanding of Aspergers Spectrum. Many people on the spectrum find it much easier to cope if they understand that things are rules. Do you find a set of rules to be helpful in your own case? If you do then we can look at phrasing the restrictions as rules for you.
I am working hard for you to help you to stay here as an editor. I think WIkipedia is better for your contributions, so I want to help you to get them right. Fiddle Faddle 12:28, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think I understand the restrictions. I'm sorry if I broke them (I didn't mean to break them) and I will try not to do that again. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 12:31, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you broke them, though I am not checking in any detail. I simply want to help you to make sure that you are on the right side of the line. Please just be very careful. :) If you need any of them explained to you the admin who unblocked you will be very happy to explain even the smallest detail to you. Please just ask them. Fiddle Faddle 12:40, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing related, but I have a hard time understanding adding proper references. Right now, I'm replacing all the dead links I find with other sources. Unfortunately, since Wikipedia doesn't show I messed up in preview of my edits, I have to make multiple times to get it right. I would like advice on how to do it properly, I'm sorry if I make to many edits trying to get it correct. I would appreciate the help. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 19:19, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The best way is to use citation templates inside "ref" tags, like so:
<ref name="Intro">{{cite web | url=http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ee415813%28v=vs.85%29.aspx | title=XAudio2 Introduction | date=October 12, 2013 | publisher=Microsoft | accessdate=2013-11-3}}</ref>
There are {{Cite book}}, {{Cite news}}, {{Cite journal}}, and {{Cite web}} templates for different kinds of references. The page WP:RS explains what things are good to use as references. -- 101.119.15.10 (talk) 22:39, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thinks. I'll try, I just wish Wikipedia shows how my ref shows up. I had to edit the Windows Store article 5 times to get it right, I should request that feature. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 23:13, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
do not forget the {{Reflist}} template/tag for the place where you want them to appear. Have a play in your sandbox and you'll soon learn. Fiddle Faddle 23:16, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, , for what it's worth, sometimes it takes me 4 or 5 edits to get a section right. Sometimes I leave out words, there are typos, I miss a bracket and everything looks screwy, it's the norm. Don't get frustrated if it takes a couple of tries to get your edit correct. It's quality that matters, not quantity. Chin up! Liz Read! Talk! 01:15, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to restore Project64 by recreating it. If I can do it on my userpage, can I build it up before incorpting it on the Project64 page(which has been redirected?) --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 15:00, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The first step would be building up a list of reliable sources, given that Project64 was redirected because of an AfD (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Project64). You can certainly do that on a user page like User:Dark Mistress/Project64. However, get advice before attempting to recreate Project64. -- 101.119.14.80 (talk) 00:19, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unrelated, but I just redirected both Firefox 1.0 and Firefox 1.5 as both were very short stubs with no real chance of improving. I don't think they are notable enough for a separate article, as 2.0 is sizable. But if you look at it was per-redirect, they were too short to keep, which is why I redirected them. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 01:46, 9 November 2013 (UTC) EDIT ALSO: Sorry for messing up the AFD I just did on Social impact of YouTube but I didn't pay attention enough. Also, the page lags a lot I'm getting slow responses from Wikipedia server on the deletion page, someone should fix it. WAY TO BIG. --Pretty les♀, Dark Mistress, talk, 17:14, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Toshiba

[edit]

Even though it's a bit naive, I think the Wired article is a strong enough source to discuss the criticism. As I said in edit summaries, I only removed it because it was WP:UNDUE to focus on one recent legal issue of a massive multinational, and by doing so imply that this is the only criticism they've ever received. It'd be fine in an article about Toshiba laptops, or about service manuals in general, but those articles don't seem to exist. --McGeddon (talk) 16:03, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know. Just one mention of a very recent incident (only a couple of years ago) is out of place which is why I removed it. You are correct they do not exist; they will never exist anyway and if created, promptly deleted as promotional material (in the case of Toshiba laptops) and or non-notable (service manual) and it is out of touch on such an old company. --Pretty les♀♥, Dark Mistress, talk, 16:08, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it looks like Wikipedia has a charmingly suspicious Planned obsolescence article - I'll see if there's anywhere useful that it can go there. --McGeddon (talk) 16:12, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's now a quiet thread about this at Talk:Toshiba/Archives/2014#Cease-and-desist_laptop_manuals if you want to chip in; the IP added it back, so I edited it into context and raised it on the talk page. --McGeddon (talk) 14:10, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 2013

[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to AMD Accelerated Processing Unit may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Evergreen/VLIW5]]-based GPU (branded [[Radeon HD 6000 Series]]) and [[Radeon HD 7000 Series]])

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:10, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

[edit]

Hi there. I blocked your account for a week. Stop logging out to mess around with other editors here. It's cowardly and mean. I've half a mind to block your account indef, as this is not the first time there have been similar problems. Yes, I checked, per policy - Alison 02:57, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

... So, ♠♠♠♠♠ is my hand; I have A Straight Arrow full of Twisted directions; by ☼ the answers. This of course... is all I say. I don't know what else to say; ♀...

I... will leave my computer on for a week. K;

K. I do admit using IP's... but I'll explain fully. I didn't even evade the blocks, because I changed my IP address in two minutes. She blocked two of them, but that was after I switched off my modem. I didn't and I repeat evade it, she blocked them long after I switched IP addresses. It's quite Useless to do so since I can switch so easily... (I have a grudge...) I will not do it again... and I won't attempt to appeal ether. But you make it look like I was evading an block; I wasn't. I was being mean however, and I realize that. I am sorry for doing that; but this is as I was tired and off my medicine. I didn't take Methylphenidatethat yesterday, but this is no excuse.
me typing on my Razer BlackWidow ulitmate 2013, I will say this. I do know I was not supposed to edit out. I did so anyway, which is wrong. I will tell you that I do have aspergers syndrome... but that is no excuse I know. I just can't get over it... maybe next time I suppose. As for the IP, it was purpously unplugged modem to get new IP. My ISP is like that, and I know I shouldn't; do note that you made it appear that I evaded a block; no I did not; if you look at the posts timeline you will see I switched between 2 IPs in several minutes. I switched between three of them, and during that time I did not get blocked at all. This is not an exusce however, and I applogise. That said, I'm testing the new gamepad API and stuff, so I may be busy. As for this, and I know I shouldn't I did it anyway. This is indeed not good, and I should have had better judgement; I don't know what else to post. Maybe an apoligy of some sort? An open letter? I could even do an image, but I'm currently doing that already on another project. The basic idea is that the premise I propose is... well... ? I must say however, what I did was uncalled for. Now that I think about it, it does put shame on me.(I did forget what I did when I went to bed however, I have short memory) I am so sorry and I will try not to do it again. But, as meant for, I'm not sure it was me or the medicine. See, the medicine I take helps me. Without it I'm crazy, which means... I'm very.. crazy in a bad way. It does not exusce me, but I did forget to take the pill. That said, I'm sorry but if that's not enough, fine. As for me, I'll continue looking around on Wiki for.. computing related articles. I am currently configuratng Razer Naga 2014 and that does take my time, but I will reply if needed. I'll refresh this page to get some replies but in the mean time, I may be absent; after all I'm kind of busy. That said, yes I abused IP adress(but I did not evade; the block was placed long after I switched IP adress) and yes I shouldn't have done that. I'll not go out and edit articles while logged out; that was a not nice thing to do. Meanwhile, I will wait for what kind of answers you will have for me. Also, I found a site that helps alt codes: http://www.alt-codes.net/ --Pretty les♀♥, Dark Mistress, talk, 18:32, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Ok, I kinda understand where you're coming from. I have family who have ADHD and are on meds, so I know that skipping a day can really make a difference. Yes, you're right in that you were not evading a block. You were just logging out - nothing wrong in itself - but you were doing so to avoid being identified so you could be mean to someone else, which is the not okay part. I can't speak for the person you were mean to, of course, but I do know she's the understanding and forgiving sort. She's had problems with her own account in the past, too. I'm not saying who it is, as it will identify those IP addresses you used. You're right, too, in that you can simply reboot your modem, get a new IP address, and get on with anonymous editing again. It's not the right thing to do, but you can technically do it. Of course, if you're caught, your main account will just end up getting blocked indefinitely and possibly, your IP range could also end up blocked, thus rendering the modem-reboot less effective. We're kinda going on trust here a bit, though, and I'm trusting you on this one (else I'd have easily blocked your range).

Anyways - best thing is, as you say, wait out the week's block. Then put it all behind you, come back and get back to doing what you enjoy most here. You'll be most welcome back :) - Alison 23:29, 21 March 2014 (UTC) Windows 8.1 multi screen with titles... as before, I use Windows 8.1 X64. I'm not sure Wikipedia reads user agent; it does not matter anyhow. Altas, I do have some questions; me as I may, due as I wish. I.. suspect Firefox can run 45 tabs without issue; current use is 524,642kb RAM. Firefox is the most effenecatn browser today. I normally run two browser windows, each with 20 or more tabs. The most memory I've used was 1.2 GB RAM. I do have 6 GB RAM, 5.6 usable because of Radeon 7340 taking 384 MB ram and other devices. That said, Firefox is a heavy duty browser nowadays.. I would be running x64 one, but it is unstable... nightly. I have two 1600 X 900 screens, extended mode. It helps my producivty a lot. I have Process explorer always running. Due to my E2-1800 being a little slow running flash, I end it when it freezes. Despite the premise, I am happy running it. I have 13 GB of pictures in my pictures, 1.3 GB of video, and 2 GB of drivers downloaded. I have a Logitech C920 webcam for talk, Razer Naga 2014 for mouse, Razer BlackWidow Ulitmate 2013 for keyboard, Mayflash 3 in 1 majic joy box, Wii U Controller adapter usb, 3 usb hubs, 2 of them daisy chained, GE keyboard mouse combo, Logitech Unifying Logitech MK550(mouse and keyboard) Logitech K400r, majic cube Bluetooth speakers, Logitech X530 5.1 speakers, Realtek HD Audio ALC 662 controlling these speakers, 32 GB Emtec flash drive, HDE USB PNP Microphone, Mayflash n64 pc usb adapter, and an xbox 360 controller pink rockcandy... Most of these were quite expensive, except the adapters... the most expensive one was the BlackWidow Ulitmate 2013. I also have a Naga 2012 but I stopped using it once I got the Naga 2014. The Snypse 2.0 lets me use the various shortcuts to programs and control volumes and macroes.. I don't use it for gaming most of the time I have it to increase my productivity... for you see, I do various things now, so I don't go posting to Wikipedia most of the time; although I still read, I quit being a heavy user. Despite this, my Programs are GIMP for drawing, Character Map for Unicode text, Paint.net for images, normal windows paint sometimes, using synapse take snapshot of windows shortcut windows 8, occasionally I will play the following steam games I own:(mostly girls games and sonic): 99 Spirits, C-Rush, Chantelise, Fiary bloom Freesia, fortune summorners: secret of the element, mitsurugi kamui hikae, recetter an item shop, santum, skullgirls, sonic adventures 2(with battle) sonic the hedgehog 4 epsidoe 1 and 2, tsukumaogmi, vanguard princess. I like anime style games and sometimes sonic. Despite this, I still play games, but not much. Currently I havn't played my games since 3/15/2014. I'll play later, but not interested right now. As for beforehand, I still wish to, but cannot play. I'm scared of what to do. Interestingly, I probably won't play them right now, but I may. As for me not going here to contribute a lot, it's not that I don't want to; it's that I'm lazy, and it takes to much time to actually do things. It's a shame to. If you ever want to buy a gaming mouse, I suggest naga 2014. Its 12 buttons on side and 2 buttons behind scroll wheel with side scrolling is the best thing. I don't use it for games normally, I use it as shortcuts using the snypse 2.0 things like an option(only on Windows) to take a snapshot of whole screen. I will list my following on my naga 2014: Side buttons:[reply]

1, Volume down,
2, Take snapshot and save,
3, macro 14: ♀
4, Voulme up,
5, Start toggle between desktop and metro,
6, charmap.exe,
7, calc.exe
8 snes9x-x64.exe
9, Keymap 2,
10, eudcedit.exe
11, sensitivy stage down,
12, Cycle Up snesnitvy stage.

Top buttons,

1, Left click
2, Right click
3, scroll click
4, mouse button 4
5, mouse button 5
6, scroll up
7 scroll down
8, scroll left
9, scroll right

That is my thoughts... I don't know, but I also play minecraft; however I haven't played it in a month. Perhaps I'm bored with it; I don't know. oh well... My settings for sound is 96000 Hz, 24 bit 5.1 audio. That's my text talking... I guess I got bored.... te-he. --Pretty les♀♥, Dark Mistress, talk, 19:17, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Careful, stalking again

[edit]

How many times do you have to be told to stop stalking me? This was not at all a coincidence, so don't bother telling me that it was. What do you do, sit up at your computer desk, watching every edit I make? Given what you have stated in the past about your obsession with me, I would not put it past you. If I sound frustrated right now, it is because I am. Because of the highly inappropriate ways you have focused on me, I don't think you should be editing in the same area I edit in at all. In fact, I might seek an interaction ban for that very reason. You were just blocked for this type of thing with regard to me, as shown in the Blocked section above on your talk page, and which I commented briefly on. And now you follow me again? Cut it out. The only reason I even bothered approaching you here at your talk page this time is because I don't want you to get the impression that I think it is okay for you to now follow me to articles and edit them after I've edited them. Flyer22 (talk) 04:48, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, I did not know you edited it. Besides this, I'm to busy to talk right now. I was reading articles when I noticed a little thing so I removed it. I did not look at the history, nor did I know you edited it. As for this, I don't edit a lot anymore; you have no proof. Now if you will excuse me, I am busy using mspaint.exe.
Do not expect me to reply back for now, I am going to sleep. §ee you... will reply at 4/18/2014 in the morning; Good night.

Also, busy with Firefox x64 nightly... so long... --Pretty les♀♥, Dark Mistress, talk, 20:50, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(Also, I did not in anyway interact with you by editing the page; that is false. I was tumbling around articles when I found a misused template placed there; I removed it, and I do not know how that is interacting. I am done for the day, and I will wait to see what you think(also, I somehow knew this was going to happen, but I did not check the history, nor did I look at your history to find it. If wikipedia has a history tracking it could prove it, but I doubt it. Altas, I'm afraid if not, I have no proof. But I assure you that is the case. Case closed.) --Pretty les♀♥, Dark Mistress, talk, 20:56, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Like WP:Sockpuppets who think they are smarter than me and can fool me, here you are feeding me your typical dishonesty. As portions of your talk page show, the portions about me, what you state about me and with regard to your editing that relates to my editing cannot be trusted. You have made it extremely clear that you are obsessed with me, stalk me and somehow cannot stop stalking me. You have also noted that you have a grudge against me, as even recently noted in the Block section on your talk page.
Edit after me again, and I will lay out all of the evidence against you regarding me (except for the emails you sent me, which I still have not read, unless it is a simple mention of them) to take you to WP:ANI and seek an interaction ban. And an interaction ban covers editing the same articles I edit -- that's one way "interaction" plays in there. For the last time: I don't care who you are. I don't care if you have Asperger syndrome which likely contributes to your obsessing over me. I want nothing to do with you, and you had better stop showing yourself to have edited after me. You have exhausted me of having any patience when it comes to you. Flyer22 (talk) 21:25, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, I will still edit any article I wish. As for this, this is the last time I edit this talk page in this section; goodbye. I can edit any articles I wish on this site; it is outright false I cannot. ╧ --Pretty les♀♥, Dark Mistress, talk, 11:36, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You won't stop following me, secretly or openly; that much is clear, even if you were indefinitely blocked. If you follow me again with the intent to do what WP:Hounding states, however, I do not doubt that you will be either indefinitely blocked or an interaction ban will be granted. You have been blocked twice for harassment of me. And regarding that first block, you might want to review the conditions of your unblock request; in other words, you should have already been indefinitely blocked once again. Flyer22 (talk) 18:43, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dark Mistress, I'm going to ask you once again to step away from Flyer22. She's clearly upset by what you're doing, and what you're doing is contrary to numerous policies. Just go edit something else, somewhere else. There are 4 million articles here. If you don't step away from her, I will block your account - indefinitely this time. And I'll followup on any IPs you use subsequently. So please just step back and leave her be - Alison 19:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

: I see. I have nothing to say for now. Good night, will reply 4/19 2014 in the morning. I'm afraid I cannot answer anything for now. --Pretty les♀♥,  Dark Mistress,  talk,  19:44, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Tired, be back in a couple of minutes, taking a shower. Had a weird dreams kind of hard to explain... --Pretty les♀♥, Dark Mistress, talk, 11:51, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Nicky animaiton file Showcard Gothic.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned image with no foreseeable encyclopedic use.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Pkbwcgs (talk) 20:14, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]