Jump to content

User talk:Fathoms Below/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ClueBot III (talk | contribs) at 00:09, 4 September 2022 (Archiving 2 discussions from User talk:CollectiveSolidarity. (BOT)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 5

Welcome!

Hello, CollectiveSolidarity, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Greyjoy talk 22:53, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi CollectiveSolidarity! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 07:14, Sunday, April 17, 2022 (UTC)

Incomprehensibility

I suspect that when you wrote "comprehensive prose and wording" on your user page, you meant to write something else. -- Hoary (talk) 23:39, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

I am sorry, but I do not understand what you mean by this. Please, can you be more concise with your statement? CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 23:42, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Concision is indeed admirable. And comprehensiveness of prose is sometimes close to its antonym. Did you perhaps mean to write "comprehensible prose and wording"? -- Hoary (talk) 04:51, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
Yes. Thank you. I should be trouted for something silly like that. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 11:56, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
Don't worry about it. I'm sure I've done much worse. (When sleepy, I even confuse "their" and "they're".) -- Hoary (talk) 12:46, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

IP 2603’s personal attacks

On the Multiverse of Madness talkpage, the comment starting with “You wanna know something really interesting?”, does it fall under WP:NOPA?--CreecregofLife (talk) 02:25, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Possibly. It certainly does sound rude. However, it must appear as a deliberate/straightforward statement or else the sysops may not consider it as a personal attack. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 02:31, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
"So you acting like some be-all-end-all authority on the matter, it's beyond ridiculous. I'm an anon user, yes, but at this point, even I can tell you to go sit in a time out."
Seems pretty direct to me CreecregofLife (talk) 02:35, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Go for it then. be bold. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 02:37, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Apparently, someone decided to tattle to ANI on me? By a newly registered user who apparently held a weeks-long grudge about a reversion I made, and then called my presence on the MoM talkpage "toxic" CreecregofLife (talk) 04:33, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Obviously the reporter is the anonymous IP. You had the right to condemn this personal attack, because this editor is making extreme accusations. I highly doubt that this newly-created account is from “someone else” in the IP’s household, and they should have never reported you when they started the personal attack. The editor should receive a warning, but please refrain from strong emotions. I try to always WP:ASG, but it is not a good look to have an outburst on ANI. I believe that you have improved from your past in edit warring, but others may not. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 05:26, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
It’s just exhausting and angering to be having to keep defending myself like this, and then be condemned for having a “battleground attitude” and no self-reflection. Like, what am I supposed to do when they handcuff my arguments like that? Nothing I say or do matters. They constantly demand i self-reflect but have yet to reflect on how I’ve actually been treated. I’ve had multiple users come at me with petty underhanded tactics and personal attacks just because I tried to be reasonable with them, or in other cases saw through some bigoted arguments and they’re taken aback when they’re called out on it. I shouldn’t be punished for getting loud and angry. I didn’t resort to insults, I didn’t curse. They won’t even try to understand what brought me to that point because all they see in me is bad CreecregofLife (talk) 06:45, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Teahouse logo

Hi CollectiveSolidarity! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, WikiFauna, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.


See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Trouted

a rainbow trout fish

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: Please see this diff. Mistakes do happen, so... B. L. I. R. 02:33, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

I’ve been trouted at last! I am so happy! Thank you! CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 02:33, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

May 2022

Hi CollectiveSolidarity. I find it strange to have to tell you this, but please refrain from blanking talk page sections like you did here, especially after others (myself in this case) have commented. Please be advised that repeating this behavior may result in loss of editing privileges. Thanks, FASTILY 06:42, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Quite ironic on my part, but I understand. It will not happen again. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 14:56, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Frankie Saluto

On 21 May 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Frankie Saluto, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Frankie Saluto was a member of the Ringling Giants, a dwarf baseball team that raised money for charity? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Frankie Saluto. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Frankie Saluto), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Regents

Theresa wasn’t regent for her son, she was a countess in her own right — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.18.192.18 (talk) 15:42, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

But she was also was the acting as Queen of Portugal while her son was just a child, that is what a regent is. Next time, explain this in an edit summary. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 15:54, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Kevin Durant

Why you delete my edits for KD? Don’t you see that I have attached the reference? You loser please stop doing foolish things. Dreamkd (talk) 18:58, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

You added commentary to that article, as Bagumba said on your talk page. To Quote Bagumba :
"While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum."
Also please do not call me a loser. That is a personal attack, and Wikipedia forbids that. Thank you, CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 19:09, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Murcielago SV production

Hi CollectiveSolidarity, One of the sources I referenced is an actual Lamborghini historian, (However, I can delete the other two sources, which were taken from two people who are not historians) who is extremely knowledgable when it comes to these types of cars. As the reliable source section states, "media must be produced by a reliable source" I'd say John Temerian is considered to be a reliable source when it comes to these types of things. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ROCKSTAR HELLA (talkcontribs) 21:05, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

I would take your word for it, but per WP:RSPYT, sources from YouTube should not be used at all. If you could find a reliable source that is not from YouTube, then you can include it in the article. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 21:09, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
Alright! Let me see if I'm able to find something not from youtube ROCKSTAR HELLA (talk) 21:22, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Newspapers.com

I'm not recalling how to go about it, but the WMF will pay subscription fees for sites like that. We also have a forum just for newer editors called The Teahouse. The volunteers there will be glad to help you find those resources. 174.212.229.61 (talk) 08:27, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for telling me this. I have not asked any questions at the teahouse yet (I prefer to read the Manual of Style) but I will ask if this service is available. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 14:25, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
I didn't realize you were so new. Scorpions13256 (talk) 23:17, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
There is also something called the Wikipedia Library that gives access to library databases. There is a minimum amount of participation to become eligible though; I am not sure what it is but the Teahouse would know. I am also willing to help if you want but the Teahouse is more official. Elinruby (talk)<

Steep

It isn’t really an editorializing word, you know, just an adjective. I didn’t revert you because people revert too much, and I don’t have actual objections to “major” except that it might possibly be a bit trite. I don’t think it’s an improvement but it’s also not wrong, basically. But ok, I did want to talk to you about it a little. If you somehow graphed the violence of the war over time, whether based on deaths, or missile strikes, economic costs, or whatever, the graph would go sharply up, so in this case the word is actually objective.

I like the way you are thinking; when I edit for neutral point of view I sometimes use an edit summary that says “removing adjectives”. I am just at loose ends for a moment and so taking the time to point out to you that while editorializing uses adjectives, not all adjectives are editorializing.

I realize that I probably sound like I’m overthinking this. Welcome to Wikipedia ;) One of my self-assigned wiki missions is keeping that article small enough to add on to still, because the war isn’t over yet, so I have been giving quite a bit of thought to its wording, especially in the lede, shrug. I hope this friendly quibble is coming across as a friendly quibble as it is intended to, and thank you for contributing to Wikipedia;) Elinruby (talk) 08:51, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

I understand. But next time, please do not include such a long section over a minor revert. It comes across as condescending. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 15:22, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

I didn’t revert it. And I was trying, apparently too hard, not to sound condescending. In any event, have a nice day. Elinruby (talk) 17:15, 5 June 2022 (UTC)