User talk:CleverTitania

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Awareness & Editing Ethics

And, unless you have evidence that I am editing in bad faith or not follow the rules of decorum on Talk pages, please don't send me sanction alerts. I do not need to know what controversial topics have discretionary sanctions on them. Because how I edit does not change based on the topic - and because I've never been sanctioned, or even come close to having been threatened with a legitimate sanction, in all my years on Wikipedia. Whether I'm editing a movie article or a poli-sci article, I still follow the encyclopedic standards and practices of Wikipedia - and if I'm not sure about a policy that someone mentions, I'll ask.

NOTE: Good editors don't wait to be asked, if they cite a Wikipedia policy or consensus point in refernce to someone's edit - especially something they've reverted - they link to the applicable policy.

Now you have been duly made aware, that I consider posting such an alert on my Talk page, without any cause whatsoever, to be an attempt at intimidation - which is expressly prohibited in Template:Alert. Have a lovely day. :)

Redundant Commentary:

You might want to sign your post. Elizium23 (talk) 04:06, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to properly indent your replies and look up user-page tags before you offer unsolicited comment. The Usage instructions of the Template:Ds/aware states specifically, "Towards the top of your own talk page, add:" Therefore, signing my own addition of this tag, to my own Talk page is, to say the least, redundant.
In fact, you might want to stop giving unsolicited advice in general, since your own grasp of Wikipedia policies and procedures is demonstrably lacking. But no need to apologize for your mistake, as I consider this conversation over. Goodbye. CleverTitania (talk) 04:59, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Some cookies to welcome you!

Welcome to Wikipedia, CleverTitania! Thank you for your contributions. I am Bluerasberry and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:29, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for speaking up at Talk:Circumcision and HIV. It is my opinion that Wikipedia volunteers do not get as much feedback on their work as they would like, so thanks a lot for speaking up. I rarely see this especially from new users. If you are ever inclined to do this again, feel free to comment on article talk pages, user talk pages, or on WikiProject talk pages. WP:WikiProject Medicine and WP:WikiProject LGBT Studies probably contribute the most oversight to issues relating to HIV and circumcision. Thanks so much for your attention to the fact that these articles come from people. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:32, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Roller coaster phobia for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Roller coaster phobia, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roller coaster phobia until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anjana Jayaprakash

found that you undid my edit..saw the reason that you provided there...but whether you check the insta page is available or not ??


If it is not available...i was wrong , who removed that link ???? Can you clarify it?? Jyomon (talk) 17:37, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jyomon: What questions you're asking is unclear. As you can see from this difference link, You removed the Instagram link from the Infobox.[1] I restored that link, because it is a perfectly valid URL to place under the heading of Website in a celebrity's Infobox.
If you're asking me if I made sure the Instagram link works before I restored it, yes I did, and yes it does. It's an active account and there's no reason to assume it isn't maintained by the actress, particularly because there are multiple selfies and personal videos on that feed. And if you would've written "broken URL" or something similar in the Edit Summary, I would've simply noted that the URL does work and not bothered digging up the shortcut for the policy. That's why editors using the Edit Summary is so vital to collaboration.
I would also add, given that I came across that edit because of the Administrator's discussion about your edits and interactions, that there's no reason to ask this question on my Talk page. The article's Talk page is the appropriate place for a simple discussion about what content is appropriate on any article - so that other editors can contribute to the conversation and so that future editors can see these discussions, and be aware of any editor consensus that has already been established. If you'd like to clarify this specific question, please don't feel you need to transfer this conversation to that Talk page; I'm just mentioning it for future reference. Also for future reference, the use of multiple question marks at the end of multiple sentences is unnecessarily exclamatory. It implies you're not just asking me why I made the edit, but implying that my choice was irrational or absurd - and it is policy to treat the edits of others as made in good faith, unless you have reason to think otherwise.
On a strictly personal note, I am impressed by the sheer number of edits you've made since you joined Wikipedia, and I genuinely hope that you figure out some of the policy confusions that I believe have influenced your edits and interactions in the past. This is just my impression, but you seem to take anyone changing or undoing your edits as a personal criticism, and it simply isn't the reality of the situation. Several of my edits have been reverted over the years, even some I genuinely disagreed with, from editors whom I respect and like. It's a large part of how we learn and become better editors - and how we develop the humility required to be a single contributor among millions of other editors. CleverTitania (talk) 03:48, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Growth team newsletter #29

18:04, 1 December 2023 (UTC)