Dremagon

IP block exempt

I have granted your account an exemption from IP blocking. This will allow you to edit through full blocks affecting your IP address when you are logged in.

Please read the page Wikipedia:IP block exemption carefully, especially the section on IP block exemption conditions.

Note in particular that you are not permitted to use this newly-granted right to edit Wikipedia via anonymous proxies, or disruptively. If you do, or there is a serious concern of abuse, then the right may be removed by any administrator.

Appropriate usage and compliance with the policy may be checked periodically, due to the nature of block exemption, and block exemption will be removed when no longer needed (for example, when the block it is related to expires).

I hope this will enhance your editing, and allow you to edit successfully and without disruption. Daniel Case (talk) 14:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Neopets

I noticed your reversion of my edit to Neopets, and that you added a self-published source. I am letting you know that you should use care when adding sources like these, as they not largely acceptable. See WP:Verifiability for more information. Thank you. Bulldog ^{talk da contribs go rando} 21:49, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment - I perfectly agree with you. I have reformatted the sentence posted by 174.125.116.37 on 03:24, 24 July 2011 to "In June 2011, Neopets announced that the website had reached 1 trillion page views since its creation." in order to better reflect the citation I provided. Perhaps this is better. However, I have no problem if you feel it should be changed it back to your last revision.

Dremagon (talk) 22:30, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Editing Wars

Dear User, Dremagon

I have been accussed of being in part of an editing war with another user, known as Nroets

There is an editing war going on with Nroets and many other members of the Wikipedia committee, Nroets keep editing and removing relevant information, huge chunks of them from the above stated page. Many users have tried to undo his edits, but he refuse to back down and led to editing wars. What is worse is that he is a Pot calling a Kettle black, complaining and asking his rivals to be blocked despite himself being one in wrong. On Save China's Tigers page, and on Bengal Tiger page

Nroets removed a fully referenced subsection, only to add 2 or 3 sentences of his own without references. I want to clean up and to just edit that subsection accordingly and has mentioned it in his talk page, but he just removed the entire subsection without valid reasons.

What he does is weird because the whole section and subsection has been there for over 3 years, just waiting for some minor clean up, and updates, however he is removing the whole chunk and adding his own little tales in it. How can the subsection be updated or clean up then? We are just trying to keep the page's integrity, trying to edit and update when neccessary, not removing whole chunk of information which has been here for over 3 years. What is the use of removing everything and adding a few words with no references. If there is any need to edit, it should be to edit and update the page from its originality, not remove everything. That has never been the policy of wikipedia. However it is always his rivals who are being blocked or in wrong. Why is this so? Is there something bias or political in wikipedia which helps him? Because i am being warned now for adding back relevant information. I see you were in the discussion on JV's talk page, so i needed someone neutral to advise me. Thanks.

China's Tiger (talk) 03:15, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Replied to on sender's talk page.

Dremagon (talk) 23:30, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

What constitutes 'nearby' and when is it relevant

I see you removed my links to maps indicating the location of John Varty's project and the Save China's Tigers projects. The one maps (Tracks4Africa) is included in Google Earth under Featured Layers. The other map is published on the SCT website, but the info is also in Google Earth as Panoramio photos, e.g. [1]. So it is very easy to see that they are approximately 6km apart.

6km is extremely close in the Karoo, a semi-desert of approximately 300km x 300km !

Saying that the two are nearby is important: Readers will realize that it is very easy to confuse the two. For example, a South African (Country Life) magazine had an article under the headline "Tigers in the Free State" [IGcms_nodes[IGcms_nodesUID]=824ae7e6dd94d4bc4e3b3c83f0d74947]. A proper Wikipedia article should help readers not to get confused. -- Nic Roets (talk) 22:25, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying the relevance of stating that they are "nearby". I agree with your sentiment in that their proximity may be of relevance to the article. Although I left this sentence as is, I do feel that the sentence in question should perhaps be moved or elaborated on, since the connection between Laohu Valley Reserve and John Varty will not be clear to most readers.

The removal of the references was necessary, however. The issue with the references is that each reference points to its own "fact", and the reader must look at them both to correlate them. This constitutes as orignial research, which is not permitted on WP, since it synthesizes information from separate references. More info on Synthesis of published material that advances a position.

It is sometimes possible to work around this by modifying the sentence to facilitate one citation within the context of another. For example: "Tiger Canyons is located in the Freestate [...] Subsequently, the Laohu Valley Reserve was established, also located in the Free State."

Thank you for your concern.

Dremagon (talk) 23:09, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

If not advertising, then self-promotion?

I thought there was a guideline on wikipedia about how you don't put up your garage bands that not very many people know about. Psypets doesn't nearly have as large of a user base as Neopets, Marapets, or Subeta, in fact, it only has 26 players and was put into the Wikipedia in the first place as a source of exposure. Also, if you play the game, Psypets doesn't really have anything to do with Maslow's hierarchy of needs, as that is an old system. Are you saying that anybody who has a pet game with only their friends who play, should be put up on the wikipedia? If so, then why isn't Kingdom Sky listed in the Wikipedia?

I won't go into an editing war with you, it's your call, but I really think you should take a better look at some of these games, to see if they have any merit being mentioned, and that they aren't just dying games with only 10 or 20 players. 108.85.29.84 (talk) 20:49, 1 October 2011 (UTC)108.85.29.84

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:30, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Dremagon/Marapets

A tag has been placed on User:Dremagon/Marapets requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DannyS712 (talk) 08:58, 28 January 2019 (UTC)