Cebran2003
Disambiguation link notification for August 12
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Stop the World – I Want to Get Off, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tea boy. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 20:03, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- I decided on a better way of referring to the disambiguation page, considering its partial relevance here. Thank you. Cebran2003 (talk) 21:04, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
October 2024
edit
Hello, I'm FlightTime. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Eddie Van Halen, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. - FlightTime (open channel) 19:53, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I was inputting the reliable source, actually a repetition of one cited elsewhere in the article, just as you were removing my content. Please leave my edits alone. Cebran2003 (talk) 19:57, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Then please use edit summaries, tell us what the hell you're doing. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Every single one of them has been minor, and supported by other Wikipedia articles or by existing references in this one. Again, please leave all my edits alone. Cebran2003 (talk) 20:15, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Also, don't you think it would be alot eaiser if you added the source with the change, why make a change and then, oh I'm getting to it. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:17, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I did all my ref checking and other reading, and consequent writing, within a space of maybe 15 minutes. I am not being slow. Instead you are being bizarrely hasty. Please undo all the reverts that you have done to my work on the article. Those paragraphs will still make perfect sense and will be better documented than before, I promise you. Cebran2003 (talk) 20:26, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hey @Cebran2003 There seems to have been some confusion over your recent edits, it's always helpful to include an edit summary to avoid this. I've restored the article as best I could for you. OXYLYPSE (talk) 20:45, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- @OXYLYPSE, thank you very much. I think that you restored every one of them, apart from one that I redid a few minutes ago: reusing the relevant reference for what are now three appearances in that single paragraph. Or at least I think that I have inputted this reuse for a second time. Anyway, all good now, so thanks again. Cebran2003 (talk) 21:01, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- (Also, thanks for the thanks for my edits, which I enjoyed doing even as I worked kind of hard on making them; your seeing the merits in them is noted and much appreciated.) Cebran2003 (talk) 21:22, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Thank you for your contributions! :) OXYLYPSE (talk) 21:28, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- On that note, we may as well end this cycle. Best wishes. Cebran2003 (talk) 21:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Thank you for your contributions! :) OXYLYPSE (talk) 21:28, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- (Also, thanks for the thanks for my edits, which I enjoyed doing even as I worked kind of hard on making them; your seeing the merits in them is noted and much appreciated.) Cebran2003 (talk) 21:22, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Shout-out as well to @SQGibbon, whose alert about overlinking brought on my 20-20 hindsight about how it is indeed best avoided! Cebran2003 (talk) 14:06, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I have just noticed, at the top of the "Revision history" page, mention of the external tool "Fix dead links"; having for the moment simply removed a pair of these, I would appreciate some guidance on how I might get started in identifying viable updates using this tool. Seeing what I saw after again logging in to try to kick off the process for this tool, I could tell that some human guidance is going to need to come first. Thanks in advance. Cebran2003 (talk) 18:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- @OXYLYPSE, three days later, I have the privilege of thanking you once again, this time for a closely related but distinct contribution on your part! As a consequence of your candor in expressing uncertainty about whether you had successfully restored all ten of my initial edits on the fantastic EVH article, I have just used tech built in to the Wikipedia platform but until this evening scarcely familiar to me (namely, the great flexibility of the "Compare versions" feature) to confirm at last my gut feeling that afterward I inputted my citation reuse for a second time and that edit number ten had consisted of this reuse and nothing more. The hugest thanks this time, saved for last! Cebran2003 (talk) 23:07, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- I am happy to acknowledge and express fresh thanks (have the others gone stale?) for @OXYLYPSE's remark made within the past couple of days that they first noticed (and wound up reporting to the ANI admin noticeboard) certain conduct -- forgiven afterward on proving rooted in a perception of trolling -- regarding the EVH article in the very context of my having just been subject to that conduct. Cebran2003 (talk) 18:58, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- @OXYLYPSE, thank you very much. I think that you restored every one of them, apart from one that I redid a few minutes ago: reusing the relevant reference for what are now three appearances in that single paragraph. Or at least I think that I have inputted this reuse for a second time. Anyway, all good now, so thanks again. Cebran2003 (talk) 21:01, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hey @Cebran2003 There seems to have been some confusion over your recent edits, it's always helpful to include an edit summary to avoid this. I've restored the article as best I could for you. OXYLYPSE (talk) 20:45, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I did all my ref checking and other reading, and consequent writing, within a space of maybe 15 minutes. I am not being slow. Instead you are being bizarrely hasty. Please undo all the reverts that you have done to my work on the article. Those paragraphs will still make perfect sense and will be better documented than before, I promise you. Cebran2003 (talk) 20:26, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Also, don't you think it would be alot eaiser if you added the source with the change, why make a change and then, oh I'm getting to it. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:17, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Every single one of them has been minor, and supported by other Wikipedia articles or by existing references in this one. Again, please leave all my edits alone. Cebran2003 (talk) 20:15, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Then please use edit summaries, tell us what the hell you're doing. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Welcome!
edit
Hello, Cebran2003, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the Wikipedia Teahouse.
- Introduction
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Simplified Manual of Style
- Your first article
- Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
- Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
- and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! OXYLYPSE (talk) 20:38, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion
edit
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Conduct of user FlightTime towards other editors. Thank you. TheWikiToby (talk) 21:59, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Cebran2003 - I'm sorry that you got dragged into the ANI discussion. I assumed it would help curb FlightTime's behaviour a bit, but the admins seem more concerned with your good faith efforts to improve an article than FlightTimes dismissive and uncivil conduct. I apologise. -OXYLYPSE (talk) 22:16, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- @OXYLYPSE, I have no regrets or concerns where the interaction between FlightTime and me is concerned, and I am in no hurry to bow out of the ANI discussion, in view of how a couple of "old boys" (a phrase that I have been known to steal and/or to omit to hasten to enclose in quotation marks) have opted to do their unorthodox variant on jumping in. Please do try to stick around there, the problem being obviously so much bigger than with my initial rollbacker. Cebran2003 (talk) 22:44, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think the ANI is only going to go one way...
- -OXYLYPSE (talk) 23:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Drmies shows "worrisome" signs of meriting some admin sanctions. Cebran2003 (talk) 23:58, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hey, again, @OXYLYPSE. I hope to have just conveyed to Liz (via the ANI thread) the kind of abstract that she just called for. Please feel free to add more, for example about your interactions if any with Drmies, or about any new considerations that their conduct may have brought to the fore from your perspective. Cebran2003 (talk) 04:38, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- @OXYLYPSE, I have no regrets or concerns where the interaction between FlightTime and me is concerned, and I am in no hurry to bow out of the ANI discussion, in view of how a couple of "old boys" (a phrase that I have been known to steal and/or to omit to hasten to enclose in quotation marks) have opted to do their unorthodox variant on jumping in. Please do try to stick around there, the problem being obviously so much bigger than with my initial rollbacker. Cebran2003 (talk) 22:44, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Procedures
editI have just learned of, and from now on will be heedful of, the bounds customary (not to be confused with mandatory, oddly or not) here on the scope of a minor edit. Other guidance provided here for my intended benefit is inapplicable to me, for example touching on what I am advised to do "when" I take a category of actions that I will never take (with respect to any article cited by name to me or indeed just in general).
- I think it was a bad decision to remove that post by Johnuniq. They are an experienced administrator and they tried to offer you some helpful advice. You are a relatively inexperienced editor who is trying to take on one of the most experienced editors on the project and ask for them to be sanctioned (which will never happen). That's just not wise no matter how right you think you are about a few edits. You should be thanking Johnuniq for his taking a moment to come to your User talk page and offer you some advice, not remove their post. Liz Read! Talk! 07:41, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Liz, in the framework of the highly limited senses in which I engage with Wikipedia content, extremely little of that advice has been on point for me. The brusqueness with which it was expressed (including in scapegoating me in the ANI closure for simply responding in almost all instances to content criticisms made by another) has been yet another shock. I will not be so naive as to reach out, or to play a part again in another's reaching out, to an admin team inclined in case of disputes to embrace lengthy Wikipedia-editing experience for its own sake. Cebran2003 (talk) 08:17, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- With respect, @Liz, the original issue I raised at ANI related to a user doing this very same thing. OXYLYPSE (talk) 08:59, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- The same but without the outright viciousness on chronic display on the part of the successor. All the overall advocacy of Netiquette adherence rings hollow when pushback against abuse comes to shoveback by the abuser. Cebran2003 (talk) 09:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)