Binnenstaat

Welcome!

Hello, Binnenstaat, and Welcome to Wikipedia!   

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Teahouse.

---

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

• Table of contents / Department directory

• The Wikipedia Adventure (a tutorial orienting you with Wikipedia)
• The Signpost, our newspaper

Need help?

• Questions – a guide on where to ask questions
• Cheatsheet – quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes
• Wikipedia's 5 pillars – an overview of Wikipedia's foundations

• Article wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
• The simplified ruleset – a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules
• Guide to Wikipedia – a thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia

How you can help:

• Contributing to Wikipedia – a guide on how you can help

• Community portal – Wikipedia's hub of activity

Additional tips...

• Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
• If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills without changing the mainspace, the Sandbox is for you.

Binnenstaat, good luck, and have fun. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:57, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

DHK

Exactly what do you think in wrong with [1] ? Why did you revert that? What's wrong with the improved sorting of the articles, or the description for the chemicals more than just "chemical" ? Or the addition of other DHK values? -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 19:30, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Please respond to messages on your talk page, since you are actively engaged in reversions with warnings. -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 04:55, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Mistaken revert at Make (magazine) article

Hello, I have written at the Make (magazine) talk page about my recent edit. I believe you have mistakenly reverted it. Please read it and decide whether to restore my edit.76.218.105.99 (talk) 03:10, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Danielle Sellers

Hello Binnenstaat, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Danielle Sellers, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: G4: plausible redirect. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Mistaken revert at Shingo Nishiyama page

Hi, I think you must have made a mistaken revert when I recently edited Shingo Nishiyama's page. I have started to recently learn to use rowspan and it took a little while for me to get used to it. Also, I have been using the edit summary because I was using the topic "Single Skating" as the edit summary. I hope you read this and decide whether you can restore my edit or not. 108.26.172.49 (talk) 03:33, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Survivor 46

You are wrong. The edit to Survivor 46 that added the episode 6 challenge was not vandalism. Do not call it as such when it was a good faith edit that has actually been made for earlier episodes in the series if you look at edit histories. That is toxic. 73.152.46.172 (talk) 09:43, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

I have looked into the edit history of this user and they seem like a power-hungry individual that believes any edit not made by themselves constitutes vandalism. Every revert I've seen from them is unexplained and bordering on edit warring, proving they're not meant to have an account with Wikipedia at all since they do not strive for constructive edits. I will report Binnenstaat the next time I see this behavior from them. 50.232.92.83 (talk) 16:07, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, I also checked and found the same. I suggest the time has already come for you to make your report. This user deleted an entire section I had just added, without explanation, which I was fortunately able to revert. See my post below. Their speedy deletion of Love Island (2015 TV series) series 3 was also rightly declined, among numerous other reversions - check thread above. Chrisdevelop (talk) 10:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

'Under-reporting' reversion

Undid your reversion at Under-reporting. This was removal of good-faith edits without explanation. There is significant under-reporting of anti-LGBT crime, and the edits I supplied are well resourced and verifiable. Happy to discuss on the article’s Talk page. Chrisdevelop (talk) 14:52, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Congrats!

Hello @Binnenstaat,

Congrats on your 500th edit!

For your 500th edit!

Myrealnamm (talk to me) 21:22, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

"X (far-right website)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect X (far-right website) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 7 § X (far-right website) until a consensus is reached. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 22:32, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 50.232.92.83 (talk) 13:59, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

April 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for misuse of automated tools such as Twinkle, as you did at Vince Offer.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 21:44, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Your lack of responsiveness on this page, as well as your cursory response at WP:AN/I are not acceptable. You were asked to voluntarily refrain from using Twinkle in any capacity after your last misuse of the tool; while that discussion was still ongoing (and while we were still waiting for your response) you continued to edit further using Twinkle, including reverting uncontroversial content with an inappropriate edit summary. Changing "prostitute" to "sex worker" on an already sourced and referenced statement, should not prompt a revert at all, let alone one with an inaccurate edit summary. As you cannot be trusted to use Twinkle effectively without disrupting the project, to prevent further disruption you are being blocked until you agree to cease using Twinkle or any other similar automated tool (broadly construed).⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 21:47, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree to cease using Twinkle or any other similar automated tool (broadly construed). Binnenstaat (talk) 22:12, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Very well, I'll unblock your account. Please take greater care with your edits and most importantly be responsive to inquiries from other users about them, moving forward. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 22:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent disruption and misuse of automated tools..

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 01:27, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

You just over 24 hours ago agreed not to use Twinkle and you're already using it again. It's clear you cannot be trusted either with automated tools, or to work collaboratively and honestly with others. This tells me you are not here to build an encyclopedia, and as such I'm reinstating your block. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 01:30, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

All the edits I made after being unblocked are reverts of obvious vandalism and have not generated any complaints. Accounts used only to revert vandalism are not WP:NOTHERE. Binnenstaat (talk) 02:29, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

It's irrelevant whether they were good edits or not. As a condition of your previous unblock, you agreed to not use the automated tools in any capacity, period. You were warned about your lack of communication; you were warned about your lack of attentiveness to your edits leading to misuse of the tools, you misused the tools, you were blocked for doing so, and then you were dishonest in your unblock request. Even now, you are showing that you lack the necessary self-reflection and competence to edit here constructively, by refusing to take responsibility for your actions. Your assistance in reverting vandalism is not required. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 03:07, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Come here by may of the malformed unblock filter. Long as I am here, endorse reblock -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:12, 12 April 2024 (UTC)