LMilagros5472

May 2019

Hello, I'm MrOllie. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, 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. If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 16:15, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Please refrain from attempting to make unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been disallowed by an edit filter. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Materialscientist (talk) 06:57, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Re edit

10/1/19 I just NOW received notice from Wiki that I have msgs. (!!!) I have NO IDEA about WHAT edit you are referring to from waaaaay back on May 19, 2019. Because you have the audacity to accuse me of VANDALISM, a hint would be nice. A link would be even better & more professional. I make A LOT of edits - mostly grammatical - so, it's impossible for me to remember what I did on Wiki in May! Please send me the specifics so I can review what horrible infraction I did that displeased you. LMilagros5472 (talk) 00:27, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Oregon Death with Dignity

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Oregon Death with Dignity requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.oregon.gov/oha/PH/PROVIDERPARTNERRESOURCES/EVALUATIONRESEARCH/DEATHWITHDIGNITYACT/Pages/faqs.aspx. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. buidhe 22:54, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Oregon Death with Dignity

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Oregon Death with Dignity. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Oregon Death with Dignity Act. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Oregon Death with Dignity Act. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, 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. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. buidhe 22:56, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

2/3/20 The article you directed me to is NOT THE PAGE I CREATED! This page was already in place. It is NOT about the DWDA itself - Death With Dignity Act - in the state of Oregon. This page is solely about the BALLOT MEASURE, LISTING IT'S BALLOT NUMBER. BTW, that ballot was from ... 1997. It passed. The page *I* created does NOT deal with the passing or failing of this measure but, instead, the 23 year old law itself & the RIGHTS & RESPONSIBILITIES it contains. LMilagros5472 (talk) 13:31, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

2/3/20 If you object to my page ... I strongly object to the TITLE of the "1994 Ballot" title. Whoever created that desperately needs to UPDATE it. As I said, the measure passed in 1997 & has been a state law in OR for 23 years. To not confuse readers from around the world, he title should read: The Death With Dignity Act - Oregon State Law. LMilagros5472 (talk) 13:36, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

2/3/20 The page I created no longer exists & is apparently UNRETREIVABLE. I wasnt even given the chance to even copy what I posted. I didnt think there would be such a commotion over what I posted, so I didnt think to copy it. That will be the LAST Wiki page I will ever attempt to create. NOT HAPPY. - - As an RN, BS, with my focus on communty heath & home health, Im VERY familiar with the 40-year fight for legalized euthanasia rights & ongoing palliative care & hospice care. Im not stupid. LMilagros5472 (talk) 13:50, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

References

Just follow the steps 1, 2 and 3 as shown and fill in the details

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Remember that when adding content about health, please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations. (There are several kinds of sources that discuss health: here is how the community classifies them and uses them.) WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a built-in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN.

1. While editing any article or a wikipage, on the top of the edit window you will see a toolbar which has a button "Cite" click on it
2. Then click on "Automatic" or "Manual"
3. For Manual: Choose the most appropriate template and fill in the details, then click "Insert"
4. For Automatic: Paste the URL or PMID/PMC and click "Generate" and if the article is available on PubMed Central, Citoid will populate a citation which can be inserted by clicking "Insert"

We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:33, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)

KROQ-FM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to New Wave

KSCA (FM) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Jewel

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:17, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Grateful Dead, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 17:26, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited KROQ-FM, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New Wave (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:28, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Carole Robertson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greenwood Cemetery (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ticking Clock, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mystery (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:25, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bennet Omalu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Igbo.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:27, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Plot size

Please don't add so much text to a film plot as you did with Ticking Clock. The guideline WP:FILMPLOT sets an upper limit of 700 words for the plot section. You can use an onine word counter such as https://wordcounter.net/ to keep track. Binksternet (talk) 03:44, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

August 2020

Please do not use styles that are unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Curse of Ham. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 01:51, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

8/29/20 ... ????.... How can I learn if you dont SHOW ME exactly what I did wrong? LMilagros5472 (talk) 06:50, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at Curse of Ham, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Sundayclose (talk) 15:11, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Take the time to read WP:MOS and MOS:BIO. Sundayclose (talk) 15:13, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Here is one of many examples of other editors besides me correcting your violations of the Manual of Style and Wikipedia policies. Excessive use of bold, expressing your personal opinions in the article, excessive detail in the lead. There are many such examples. Here is an editor responding to your baseless accusations against me. Please consider the possibility that the problems may be with you instead of other editors, then stop attacking other editors and exert some effort to learn policies and guidelines, and then edit conservatively until you get a better grasp of the way Wikipedia works. Wikipedia is a collaborative project. Refusing to work cooperatively and learn how things work here is not an option. Sundayclose (talk) 15:42, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

9/6/20 Blah, blah, Mr Know It All. Ive copied the critique you linked, it reads: "Have you ever noticed that the most indignant complainers never offer any sources to back up their positions? It must be an awful burden to walk around thinking you are the sole bastion of truth. John from Idegon (talk) 15:32, 30 August 2020 (UTC)" // Well, isnt THAT the pot calling the kettle black! I went to college, wrote a "zillion" research papers, all manuallydone WITHOUT COMPUTERS, btw. Very tedious. So, Im well aware that it is "forbidden" to write statements without "citing your sources." However, this fool, "John- Whatever" did EXACTKY WHAT HE ACCUSED ME OF DOING! - He "never offer(ed) any sources to back up (HIS) positions." So, I have no clue as to what either one of you is bitching & complaining about. He didnt take the time, as any TEACHER WORTH HIS/HER SALT SHOULD DO, to point out my so-called errors & WHY they are errors. As Ive stated, I was taught to read everything from the view of an ESL person, a non-American AND someone with only 4th grade reading skills. In reading the Wiki page from THOSE viewpoints on both Ham & REV. DR. MLK, Jr., I was confused as f***. I know about those 2 subjects. Most ppl dont. Too many unexplained assumptions were found in them. All I try to do when I edit is correct errors & misinformation where I see it & make the info easier to understand for ppl of ALL backgrounds, ALL ages, ALL levels of English language skills, ALL educational leves & knowledge of American hx & culture. Americans always think they are the end-all, be-all of the universe, & therein lies the communication problems. LMilagros5472 (talk) 23:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

• I see that others have already tried speaking with you about the following issues issues, though Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people) would have also been good for others to link to. You need to stop taking your edits so personally because that kind of attitude leads to edit warring, which leads to being blocked. Screaming (i.e. TYPING IN ALL CAPS) ageist entitlement isn't going to help. You also should avoid going into personal attacks, too. Try reading other's posts as if they're trying to help you instead of imagining the worst possible interpretation of what they wrote. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:15, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

September 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Joanne Whalley, you may be blocked from editing. Sundayclose (talk) 00:02, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

9/7/2020 09:20am CA time

To Sundayclose: Your warning to me & the blank reply box keep popping up every time I go to my page. I guess Im mandated to reply? FYI: All issues have not only been discussed ad nauseum ... they were resolved several hours ago. :-) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiVampire and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers LMilagros5472 (talk) 16:30, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

September 2020

Please do not ever, under any circumstances, change words used within cited quotations because you happen not to like them. This edit of yours to Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis was unacceptable and disruptive, and was reverted by Factfanatic1. Your aggressive edit summary suggests you think you know better than the cited source. If you can't be bothered to check the quotation, please don't bother us with your views on the correct use of words. We permit incorrect word spelling, grammar and word usage within quotations for reasons that should be blindingly obvious to anyone. Your changes to the lead sentence were also unhelpful.

Please treat this as warning not to edit so aggressively and disruptively, and to listen when other experienced editors tell you not to do something. You came a bit close to a possible block tonight, having been reported for 'vandalism' at WP:AIV, though that was an error of judgement on the other editor's part. But I do sense a failure on your part sometimes to listen, understand and to follow our requirements (explained at WP:MOS and elsewhere) So, I am spending time writing this in the hope you will listen to these and previous concerns expressed to you above. Failure to work collaboratively tends to result in editing privileges being withdrawn, either temporarily or permanently. Please be civil and not accuse other editors of being trolls, and please don't use CAPS as this is deemed as rather aggressive shouting. You may have age and knowledge on your side, but you also need a willingness to listen, read and understand Wikipedia's ways of doing things collaboratively. Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:05, 7 September 2020 (UTC)  

Final warning for violating WP:Verifiability

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:15, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ohnoitsjamie: I think perhaps this warning might be a bit of an unfortunate pile-on, especially after the somewhat heavy handed warning by SundayClose just above for this edit. They and I happened to have an edit conflict in our own, separate warning notices, and I would not want another admin to now drop by and see all three of our notices together and feel they were justified in some draconian blocking action without spending time assessing what has been happening. I sense this editor is misguided, rather than intentionally disruptive, and I would like to think they had already got the message that they should either include citations to new content, or not add it at all. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:28, 7 September 2020 (UTC)      

September 2020

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Sundayclose (talk) 00:16, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Inappropriate warning notice. I had already issued a clear warning for that edit. This additional notice is quite unnecessary! Nick Moyes (talk) 01:44, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  331dot (talk) 00:24, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I suggest that you heed the advice you are being given on this page. If nothing changes, you will likely be blocked for longer in the future. 331dot (talk) 00:26, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@331dot: What?? I really don't believe this was an appropriate block from you at all. Can you explain or justify it? This user had already had a valid, carefully-worded warning from me about their interactions and actions which happened to edit conflict with a very stern warning from Sundayclose about not giving a citation to recently added good faith content. Our two notices clashed around 00:02 UTC, and the user has not edited since 23:46, and still hasn't. Sundayclose's second warning notice came at 00:16 and was wholly unjustified, and just more pile-on, as they should have seen that I had already warned the user about not calling people trolls on the Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis page, and telling them to interact more collaboratively, and less belligerently.

I didn't even think that Ohnoitsjamie warning was anything other than pile on here. So, after posting a message to tell them so, I was horrified to find you had dropped in and had blocked this user for 2 days. Now, maybe I could have given them that 2 day block after seeing them reported at WP:AIV, but I investigated and found it was actually a bad report for which the reporting editor Factfanatic1 has prior form for bad AIV reports and so I warned them, too (but they appear to be permanently leaving Wikipedia after some kerfuffle elsewhere). I spent quite some time going through this user's past edit history and prior warnings to assess the measure of my response. So, not meaning to sound rude, but I really don't feel either you or Jamie invested the time to warrant either his final warning or your short block. This is a really unfortunate car-crash of events, and I want to stand up here to ensure this editor sees that we admins can and do act fairly and reasonably. So I would invite you to reconsider your block. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:01, 7 September 2020 (UTC)    

I came here as a result of this request for protection request. I saw that you'd already warned them for edits to Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, but I noticed numerous other edits (that not not yet been reverted) that were clear violations of WP:V. I simply wanted to make it clear, broadly speaking, that any more violations of that would not be tolerated. However, to your point, I see that LMilagros5472 made no further edits after my warning (or Sundayclose's), so I could see your point about a block being a little premature. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 01:10, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Y'all, I also talked with them about this just a few hours ago over the same incident. Two hand-written notes and two templated warnings with no further action would render the block punitive, not preventative. Unless 331dot can provide a better reason for blocking, I'm inclined to say we should unblock. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:17, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

9/62020 20:27 CA TIME. Im hoping this message gets to EVERYONE (Ive lost count!) who has "bagged" on me today, & not just this particuar person. All this drama has not made for a pleasant, relaxing Sunday, that's for sure. All I can say is .. my, my ... what a stink my editing has caused. I have 3 rebuttals to all 5 or 6 of you re my Joanne Whalley additions. 1) Someone removed the DATE I ADDED of 2003 for her work with Blink 182. Why did I add that? Bc I found it to be a pain in the a** to STOP what I was reading & look it up! I find *THAT* to be disruptive. I was curious to know WHEN that song was recorded. I felt adding the yr would help future readers to not have stop in mid page when they could CONVENIENTLY have the date for them right there. 2) The original author, who did a nice job, btw, forgot to add the "the" to Matrix Theatre. IT HAS IT'S OWN WIKI PAGE, hello! When I changed it to The Matrix Theatre everybody who is NOT from LA can quickly read about it, if interested. I do NOT feel something with it's own Wiki page is an "unsourced reference." So, I "sourced" it. 3) The original article says nothing about Ms. Whalley's career after 2018. I was curious to know if she had any current projects. So, again, I had to stop reading the article & do a net search. Guess what? SHE DOES. A movie. And, guess what? It just happens to finally debut TOMORROW, Mon, 9/7, after a 5-month Covid delay. And ... guess what? That movie has it's own Wiki page, too! I believe it's called "Love Is Love Is." I didnt make any of that stuff up. I just conveniently added what what already there, for those interested. Yes, this 2020 movie is buried in the table provided ... if anyone takes the time to go through all of that. Again, how that paragraph referring a movie to its own Wiki page is considered "unsourced" is beyond me.LMilagros5472 (talk) As for the Jackie O debacle, I dont remember CHANGING someone else's quote. If I did ... "my bad," obviously. I will have to re-read the article again. As for my comments to "Fact-Whatever" to "knockit off" - he/she REALLY aggravated me because not just 2 seconds after I changed/added things, he/she REPEATEDLY came right behind me & undid them all. My changes/additions to that page did have a connection to the Whalley page bc the movie in which she played Jackie O was listed twice & yet when I'd click on BOTH links I was sent to 2 ... 2 ... different sites. I couldnt find the error & thought maybe it was due to the MANY names Jackie O was known by. That's a moot point, at this stage. LMilagros5472 (talk) I dont know how all of this works or how any of you immediately know when & what I edit. There must be at least a MILLION ppl who change stuff on Wiki each day! So, I can only guess that you have the ability to "red flag" my name & are notified each time I'm even LOOKING at a Wiki page. I may not only stop editing Wiki pages I feel are innacurate, poorly written or missing current info, I may stop READING anything on Wiki. I dont need or want the drama or the attacks & it's really annoying when certain ppl act like they are the "King of Wiki." There are much more serious issues on this planet that need my attention. That's all I have to say. Thank you to all who even bother to read this. Laura Milagros5472 (Im not a "him" as someone inferred)

Factfanatic1 OhNoitsJamie 331dot Ian.thompson Sundayclose NickMoyes

Wow! 6 ppl. Almost enough for a baseball team! lol.

And this response leaves me less inclined to unblock. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:32, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

9/6/2020 22:07 CA TIME To @ian.thompson (talk). So, you think the 3 or 4 Wiki pages I referenced in Ms. Whalley's page are bogus and not relevant & "vandalism"? Plz explain & validate?

@Factfanatic1 @OhNoitsJamie @331dot @Sundayclose @NickMoyes LMilagros5472 (talk) 05:11, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

That response suggests that you haven't quite looked at my messages. Although it does vaguely reference content (but in a way that would be more relevant to the Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis article), it is more concerned with behavior. To elaborate on that, you might want to read WP:AGF and WP:BATTLEGROUND until you understand what the problem is (because when those are the problems, just telling the person what the problem tends to upset them further). Ian.thomson (talk) 05:30, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

9/6/2020 22:23 CA TIME To @ian.thompson (talk). I've read EVERYONE'S msgs VERY carefully. Im not deliberately ignoring them. But, from my perspective, everyone seems to be ignoring my very simple, clear questions. So, I will ask one more time: Do you believe that the 3 or 4 Wiki page links I added to Ms. Whalley's page are bogus, not relevant, "not sourced" & using the Wiki-only term, actual malicious "vandalism"? In a previous post Ive listed all the WIKI LINKS to WIKI PAGES which @Sundayclose promptly obliterated. I think this does a great disservice to Ms. Whalley, The Matrix Theatre in LA & the new movie by Eleanor Copppla - MRS Francis Ford Coppola, btw! Plz explain & validate why these Wiki links to Wiki pages are forbidden.

@Factfanatic1 (talk) @OhNoitsJamie (talk) @331dot (talk) @Sundayclose (talk) @NickMoyes (talk) LMilagros5472

LMilagros5472 (talk) 05:48, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

You're asking me about a matter I have neither commented on, referenced, nor care about. That's a matter to settle with the users who are actually involved in that. Ian.thomson (talk) 05:52, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

9/6/20 22:59 @ian.thompson ... Well, now Im REALLY confused. If your knickers arent in a knot over the Wiki links I added to Joanne Whalley's page ... then just WHAT is your "beef" with me? Bc 6 .. 6 .. of you ganged up on me, I cant keep everyone's complaints straight. So, plz clarify ... what do YOU think I did wrong? Thank you in advance for your CLEAR, CONCISE response. LMilagros5472 (talk) 06:05, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Oh, ok, so you haven't read my messages, despite claiming to have done so carefully. Ian.thomson (talk) 07:26, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

• I might have been inclined to remove the block before the recent comments by this user, but they show IMO that the behavioral issues will recur if the block is removed. However, if they commit to addressing the issues raised, and/or another admin thinks that another chance is warranted, I have no objection to removing it. 331dot (talk) 07:43, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) (331dot: see end, please) Hey - I'm on your side here, Laura. You have been unfairly treated, in my view, though I can probably see how it came about. I'd be upset too, as you have been editing in good faith recently, but without the full appreciation of how things are done around here. You can really help yourself by easing off on the expressed anger, because fighting everyone over everything is seen as disruptive in itself, and tends to attract more attention to your editing.

I'm afraid none of your posts have notified any of the intended recipients. You have devised your own weird and ineffective method of time stamping your posts which only serves to cause confusion and doesn't notify anyone at all. If you read WP:PING you'll learn how it works. (In essence, within one single 'publish' action you must do two things to cause the recipient to get a notification alert. Firstly, you must write the recipients username in the correct format. @Nick Moyes simply won't work, but {{re|Nick Moyes}} or {{u|Nick Moyes}} will. Secondly: please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~ at the end of your post. This automatically adds a date/timestamp which causes the system to send the notification when you publish. Indent your reply on a new line with one extra colon.

Having gone through them all once already, I could go through all your edits a second time and explain to you where each one was constructive and well intended, and point out the few that were unhelpful, and which ones got you into trouble. I am not willing to spend even more time here doing that as I am not sure you would be willing to listen and take the time to understand why. (I base that on your pretence of not understanding what you did wrong in editing the quote in the Onassis article, when your edit summary made it perfectly clear you didn't like the use of one particular phrase: 'interior decoration'). But I was quite happy with your good faith, but uncited edits that were reverted at the Whalley article. Well, all except the stupid first one that effectively added a note to the article to say 'don't remove this, I'm coming back to add detail latter'. (no diff, sorry, as I'm now editing on a mobile). That would certainly have made people realise we had an editor on the loose who didn't know what they were doing, or how to go about it. So its hardly a surprise when a set of follow up uncited edits were rolled back.

Like I said: I'm on your side here at the moment. You also got unfairly dumped on by a bad report at WP:RFPP which drew further admin attention. Keep try to keep calm and be willing to recognise when you made mistakes, and you'll find others probably are too. If you took the time and trouble to follow our guidance pages and not try to do things your own way (and support everything you add with an inline citatio) and use short, less assertve and sometimes plainly wrong edit summaries, you'll have fewer people checking up on you, each ready to pile on should you put a foot wrong. And sorry about the gender mistake by one or more of us here. Most people exhibiting your style of editing behaviour tend to be belligerent or over-opinionated blokes who aren't too hot on collaborative working. Simple error on our part, I'm afraid.

(ADDENDUM after edit conflict: I would support an unblock of this user, as they have, I feel, experienced an unfortunate set of events. But I would equally support a longer block should they fail to learn how to edit less disruptively in future. It's that that will probably see Laura blocked in future, and not their good faith but sometimes misguided attempts to edit the encyclopaedia. It's up to each user to put the effort in to learn how to edit and to cite correctly, or to stop and to seek help if they are unsure what they're doing. This is not a battleground.) Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 08:30, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I have removed the block. 331dot (talk) 08:35, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. Let's hope this lasts. I'm happy to be approached to look into any future concerns, or to offer short guidance/help, if needed. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:42, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

9/7/20 5:39CA time From my perspective, the way the Wiki msgs are configured are VERY confusing to me. I really cant tell who is sending what. But ... I really the appreciated the 2 most recent msgs, one from Nick Moyes and the msg & notice to "unblock" from 331dot. If I am wrong as to who sent the msgs, PLEASE accept my apology! "My bad!" Thank you for SHOWING me how to do, for lack of a better term, Wiki "hashtags." I saw the @so-and-so in several msgs over the weeks & also tonight, so I thought that was "how it was done." Obviously, I was wrong. I hope I get this right: @Nick Moyes: & 331dot. You stated I need to "sign (my) posts on talk pages by typing 4 ... tildes..." So, why does "it" say right underneath the reply box, "...your reply will be automatically signed w/your username." Has "it" not been doing that? I thought Ive seen my name listed at least twice per reply. So, I will close this msg with the 4 tildes. I wish address several issues in order & then I'll shut up. lol. You called one thing I did "stupid" - ouch!- but there's a reason for that. I did TEMPORARILY put a sentence to not "remove this, I'm coming back to add detail later'. In my defence, I wrote that bc ppl were coming behind me deleting things faster than I could add them & I had to leave the Wiki page to do copying & pasting of he concept I wanted to add & I was "saving my place." I think I was gone from the Wiki page for less than 2 minutes. I normally would NEVER do that, but last night was a nightmare & an exception. -- Re the "gender mistake," ansolutely no offense taken. Your edited comment, "Most ppl exhibiting your style of *behaviour* tend to be ...*blokes* who aren't too hot on collaborat(ion)." That comment actually made me laugh. And the words encased in **, including *recognise* & *encyclopaedia* made me smile bc I'm pretty sure Im speaking w/someone from one of these great countries: GB, or one of the other countries in the UK or AU or NZ. -Cheers, mate!- Re the Onasis edit: I wrote an apology about my misread,but I obviously sent it to the wrong person. I said I would NEVER deliberately change a quote, bc I was taught very well & I know better than that! For some reason, I didnt see the quotation marks. So,that was totally "my bad." In conclusion, Im going to try finishing my edits on the Joanne Whalley page again later this week, using the same Wiki links I did before. In my prior edits that were accepted, the links to Wiki pages were ALSO accepted. So, I still dont understand why some were accepted & others were rejected, thus causing the huge commotion. If my final edit & these Wiki links to the info I add are not permitted, or are unacceptable, rejected, etc, then I would hope someone will clearly explain WHY. Ever since I was a little kid when told, "NO!", I always demanded to know the reason WHY. "Cheeky." lol. If my edits & Wiki links for Joanne Whalley are once again rejected, I think it wise, think it best, to cease editing on Wiki ... no matter how strong the pull will be to correct or update something I see in the future. I like to do things that are fun, positive & productive. I also like to make ppl happy, not miserable. And, believe it, or not, I DONT like to fight or argue. I must add that all the edits I've done were done in good faith ... so, all the stress I've been put through as a result is just not worth it. So, with that being said .. I will now try to sign off correctly LMilagros5472 (talk) 13:47, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Brilliant! Your 'ping' to me worked perfectly because you did the two essential things I suggested. (I dont need to do that myself here because every editor gets alerted if someone posts in their page.) I wont comment further now (except to say I am indeed a Brit who also dislikes conflict). Let's make this a fresh start. We need all the female editirs we can keep, so feel free to ping me once youve readded the Whalley material and a ref. Notice how I used one colon to indent my reply; for you to reply to me you would add two colons (and no need for your manual timestamps at the start, now!) Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:29, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Nick, Quick questions. Can everyone read ALL messages to me & my replies to them? In other words, in regards to this situation, can the other 3 of the 6 involved in the initial "pile up" keep up with the conversations & resolutions without a direct reply from me? And ... is it possible for me to copy & paste my last reply to you & put it to the attention of the initiator of the "pile up?" Thanks! I did put 2 colons at the beginning ... let's see if I did it right! lol

LMilagros5472 (talk) 16:45, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, you did that right, and yes, nothing is secret or hidden on Wikipedia - even draft and sandbox pages. The only significant thing that I cannot see is what pages are on your WATCHLIST, nor can you see mine. I can add articles and users to my list and, by clicking on 'Watchlist' at the top right of the screen in Desktop view (i.e. not on a mobile), you can view recent changes to that list. If you wish, you can also set your user 'Preferences' to turn on or off email notifications and other alerts. (Go to this page to do that.)

I suspect that most of the other users (including three admins) will see this current discussion, but might feel reluctant to join in unless I said anything wrong, or missed something important out. What I tend to do when I encounter an editor either having problems (or causing problems!) is to add their page to my watchlist for a few days or a week just so I can either help them or monitor their activities, and advise or warn, as necessary. Wikipedia is open and can be edited by anyone, so it's important that we work by consensus and with nothing hidden from others. If you actively wanted to call another editor's attention to a discussion here, you would need to do that dual action of correctly including their username and signing your post as you've just doe in the same edit action (it doesn't work if you do it separately).

I would suggest that you don't 'ping' the original editor, but let sleeping dogs lie. If you're willing to work with me, I'm happy to guide you, on condition that if you know you have a habit of jumping down other people's throats, or perhaps challenge everything that goes against you, that you actively rein that in a bit. I really am keen to encourage more female editors here, but am also keen to avoid being drawn into a shit-fest (pardon my French) between editors. I suspect they've got the message that I'm going to be watching your and their interactions for a while, just as you have. I hope that's OK with you? But if they want to chip in with anything constructive, they are quite free to do so.

Whilst we can keep this topic open, the thread has already got quite long. So, I'm going to open a new topic for you now, into which you can list any areas of editing Wikipedia you are a bit confused about. I'll make it a bulleted list, and I'll try and answer anything you feel confused about. You are probably aware we have The Teahouse? This is a 24/7/365 help forum for editors seeking advice. It really is a great way to get help if you're worried you've dome something wrong, or are stuck doing things that you feel should be simple - but aren't. Hopefully this'll be a bit of a fresh start after a torrid few days. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:36, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Things I don't understand

Laura: as I've just suggested immediatly above, feel free to make a list below of any of the things you don't understand, and I'll try and either help directly or point you towards guidance pages that you will need to read to understand how things operate. Start each line with an asterisk to create a new bullet point, and I'll add any answer beneath it. Try to keep questions short and simple. I've mocked up three to get you started. (It helps if you can ping me if you add to them.) Nick Moyes (talk) 19:36, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

• Is there an interactive tutorial on editing Wikipedia?

yes, try The Wikipedia Adventure. It's possible to collect 15 different badges for taking the tour.

• People say some of my edits have been 'disruptive', yet I meant them in good faith. How can I learn more?

Try reading through Wikipedia:Disruptive editing and then following some of the links from within that article to learn more.

• Why should people stay civil when they clearly being *ssh*les?

Whether it's you or the other person who is acting the jerk, it's important to remain calm and interact politely and reasonably at all times so that we can collaborate together. in fact, it's one of our 'Five Pillars' - see WP:CIVIL to find out more. It is so easy to take offence when something you've done get reverted. Avoid getting into WP:EDITWARRING mode where you each revert each other continuously, or write inappropriate or angry posts/edit summaries. Walk away for a while and come back later. Nothing you have done has been lost - it's all there in the 'View History' tab, which you can retrieve later, if needs be. If another editor disagrees with you, engage simply and non-aggressively. See WP:BRD for one approach to collaborative working. Seek WP:CONSENSUS over disputed content from other editors on the article's talk page.

Thanks for all these tips! Much appreciated! LMilagros5472 (talk) 18:19, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Just checking in

Hello. I noticed you'd not edit since the above conversations, and I was hoping this hadn't put you off permanently. Drop by my talk page if you need any help, or are unsure of anything (or you could ask at the Teahouse if you need a really quick reply). I was pleased to note that another admin has restored your edits to Joanne Whalley, which is good news, and added some supporting citations, too. All the very best, and come back soon! Nick Moyes (talk) 09:21, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 03:01, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Chrism Mass, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cardinal.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Don't know how to do Wiki links that contain ( ) ... I do not have a working computer ... only a smart phone. I do the best I can with limited technology LMilagros5472 (talk) 18:48, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

4/25/21 4:40pm CA time ... Well,fix it, then, DONT DELETE CORRECT INFO RE THIS TOPIC. I do not know how & cannot seem to figure out how to link Wiki pages that have ( ) - parenthesis - in the title. (most annoying) I also DO NOT have a computer. All editing I do is done via a cell phone. Cell phones are notorious for having LIMITED admin abilities. LMilagros5472 (talk) 23:41, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Church tabernacle, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Communion and Ciborium.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Well,fix it, then, DONT DELETE CORRECT INFO RE THIS TOPIC. I do not know how & cannot seem to figure out how to link Wiki pages that have ( ) - parenthesis - in the title. (most annoying) I also DO NOT have a computer. All editing I do is done via a cell phone. Cell phones are notorious for having LIMITED admin abilities. LMilagros5472 (talk) 23:38, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 31

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Muscadin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Germinal.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Orisha, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pantheon.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Edits to lead section of Five Little Pigs

I reverted your edits to the lead section of Five Little Pigs, beginning here, as the lead is not the place for a lengthy plot summary. The plot summary is in the body of the article, and is not that long, either. Now the plot summary comes in just under 800 words. The title of that section is Plot or Plot summary, not the longer title you added. The opinions about the book are highlighted in the third paragraph, all taken from the reviews of the book by others which document the notability of the book, in newspapers or books. See WP:PLOTSUM and WP:WAF for more discussion of writing about fiction on Wikipedia. The lead section is discussed at WP:MOSLEAD. For fiction, another editor long ago advised me to be concise in the lead, and suggested highlighting the reviews of a novel as a third paragraph. You see this article's lead follows that format. Further, all the articles about books by Agatha Christie open in the same way, establishing the title, as some books had one title in the UK and another in the US, the year of publication, and the publishers and the prices. Those data were gathered years ago by editors with access to the soruce book with the UK information on original publisher and prices. I maintain that pattern, set long before I began editing any of the articles on books by Agatha Christie. This particular article needs work in the References and allusions section, as some editor in 2017 marked the section as not having sufficient references. There are inline citations there now, but I do not know if they are strong enough to support all the points made. The source that is a collection of 5 stories has an introduction by Robert Barnard on pages 7-8 that can perhaps be put to better use. When you click on that reference, you will be connected to a copy of the book, and can thus read that introduction on the screen. That is a topic worth your effort. The secondary sources are the basis for the notability of the book, and keep us editors from doing Original Research. -- Prairieplant (talk) 07:33, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Re: your edit of the Fried Green Tomatoes plot summary

Your 31 October 2021 edit of the plot summary is not in accordance with MOS:FILM. Before your edit, the total wordage of the summary (639 words) complied with WP:FILMPLOT. You turned the summary into 970 words. Please see topic regarding your edit in article's Talk page: "Plot summary increased beyond allowable wordage". Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 11:05, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

The plot was restored to its status on 08:36, 31 October 2021, before your addition of 331 words. See article talk page @ Talk:Fried Green Tomatoes#Plot summary increased beyond allowable wordage. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 03:56, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:54, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

October 2022

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Rock music. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Binksternet (talk) 02:16, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

10/28/22 2:11am PDT To Binksternet: Wow! I've actually encountered the God of Rock n Roll. I'm humbled & honored. Apparently you own or you **think** you own this page & must have it flagged when someone attempts to edit. Have you READ the articles in RS & others you cited? I have. I have the hard copies of them - i.e., good ole fashioned paper! Are you a R n Roll/music historian & professor of the subject? Are you even over 50? There has been a long raging controversy as to when & who started R n R, but I DO know it was NOT a genre in the 1940s. It was GESTATING in the 40s & early 50s. Ike Turner & others were tinkering with it's prototype, but nothing solid happened until 1951 with "Rocket88". The first true R n R hit was in 1955 with Chuck Berry's "Maybeline" - *THAT* is when R n R was "born". Are you an English teacher or English major? I attempted to correct grammatical errors & improve the flow of the info. You rejected it - twice. I don't see what most ppl see when they edit a Wiki page bc I do so on an Android & not a PC, not an easy task. So, you win. I'm not going to waste any more of my precious time correcting your mistakes on this page bc you insist on being a Wiki Nazi.If you don't care that ppl all over the world are reading poor English grammar AND misinformation about Rock Music in the area "above the fold" - the section that is read the most - well, that's on you. I do strongly suggest that my edit to the final paragraph at least be accepted for continuity's sake. It's very poor writing to sum things up in the middle of an article. (The sentence pointing out Rock's demise as of 2010.) That type of error in a paper would get a "D" if submitted in a uni class. LMilagros5472 (talk) 09:42, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

June 2023

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Oluniké Adeliyi. Thank you. SuperMarioMan (Talk) 00:01, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

6/24/23 ~5:00pm.CA time

WELL, FUCK YOU TO HELL, "SUPERMARIOMA"!!!🖕🖕 IN 2 SECONDS YOU WIPED OUT WHAT TOOK ME OVER 2 HOURS .. 3 HOURS!!! ... TO RESEARCH & EXPAND THE SPARSE INFO LISTED ABOUT THIS UNDER-RATED ACTRESS. FUCK YOU! I JUST HATE ENCOUNTERING CONTROL+FREAK WIKI-NAZI-BOTS LIKE YOU! YOU ACT LIKE U OWN THE WHOLE GODDAMN INTERNET!! I KNEW I SHOULD'VE JUST LET THIS PAGE BE, BUT I HATE READING HALF-ASSED, INCOMPLETE PAGES! ALL OF THE INFO I POSTED - NAMES, PLACES, RTC, ARE FOUND EVERYWHERE ... EVERYWHERE ... ON THE NET! I DID NOT JUST PULL THEM OUT OF MY ASS NOR DO I KNOW THIS ACTRESS WAS ATTEMPTING TO POST CONFIDENTIAL INFO. WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU? OLUNIKÉ'S FIRST NAME **IS** WENDY ... & IT SAYS SO IN MORE THAN 1 REFERENCED ARTICLE CITED ON THAT VERY PAGE BY THE PAGE'S CREATOR! HELLO?! HER 2 HUSBAND'S NAMES ARE PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE & ... HER DAUGHTER ALESHA BAILY HAS BEEN IN COUNTLESS MOVIES (SHE DOES NOT YET HAVE HER OWN WIKIPAGE) THERE ARE ALSO PHOTOS OF OLUNIKÉ WITH HER HUSBAND RAJIV AT PUBLIC CANADIAN & AMERICAN CELEBRITY EVENTS & ALSO OF HER & HER DAUGHTER AT IDENTICAL VENUES. THEIR EXISTENCES, THEIR NAMES & IMPORTANCE IN MS. ADELIYI'S LIFE IS PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE VIA INTERVIEWS, PUBLIC PRINT & PUBLIC PHOTOS. -- SO ... "THANKS" (i.e., "fuck you") FOR BEING SO STUPID & UNINFORMED, "THANKS" FOR BEING A WIKI-NAZI-BOT & RELYING SOLELY ON A MINDLESS COMPUTER PROGRAM TO DO YOUR CHOPPING AUTOMATICALLY INSTEAD OF TAKING THE TIME TO VERIFY THE VALIDITY & TRUTH OF WHAT WAS ADDED TO THE PAGE. AND ... A REALLY BIG "THANKS" FOR MAKING ME WASTE ALMOST 3 FUCKING HOURS OF MY TIME! FIRST, BY REVERTING OR WIPING OUT THE PAGE, WHICH U DESTROYED IN A MATTER OF 2 MINUTES & SECOND, WASTING EVEN MORE OF MY TIME DUE TO HAVING TO WRITE THIS MESSAGE TO U, WHICH U PROBABLY WONT READ. AND, MOST OF ALL, THE BIGGEST "THANKS" GOES OUT TO YOU FOR ABSOLUTELY DESTROYING & RUINING MY AFTERNOON! AGAIN, FUCK YOU, WIKI-NAZI-BOT!! 🖕🖕

My phone froze & Id dropped it at the same time - right before I was to hit "send". I think this combination caused it to be sent prematurely. I can't tell bc Working on Wiki with s phone is 1000 times different than using a computer. So, this reply may have been sent 3 times in error. I want to make it clear that I AM NOT "spamming". If this was sent 3 times - it was beyond my control.

6/24/23 ~5:00pm.CA time WELL, FUCK YOU TO HELL, "SUPERMARIOMAM"!!!🖕🖕 IN 2 SECONDS YOU WIPED OUT WHAT TOOK ME OVER 2 HOURS .. 3 HOURS!!! ... TO RESEARCH & EXPAND THE SPARSE INFO LISTED ABOUT THIS UNDER-RATED ACTRESS. FUCK YOU! I JUST HATE ENCOUNTERING CONTROL+FREAK WIKI-NAZI-BOTS LIKE YOU! YOU ACT LIKE U OWN THE WHOLE GODDAMN INTERNET!! I KNEW I SHOULD'VE JUST LET THIS PAGE BE, BUT I HATE READING HALF-ASSED, INCOMPLETE PAGES! ALL OF THE INFO I POSTED - NAMES, PLACES, RTC, ARE FOUND EVERYWHERE ... EVERYWHERE ... ON THE NET! I DID NOT JUST PULL THEM OUT OF MY ASS NOR DO I KNOW THIS ACTRESS WAS ATTEMPTING TO POST CONFIDENTIAL INFO. WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU? OLUNIKÉ'S FIRST NAME **IS** WENDY ... & IT SAYS SO IN MORE THAN 1 REFERENCED ARTICLE CITED ON THAT VERY PAGE BY THE PAGE'S CREATOR! HELLO?! HER 2 HUSBAND'S NAMES ARE PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE & ... HER DAUGHTER ALESHA BAILY HAS BEEN IN COUNTLESS MOVIES (SHE DOES NOT YET HAVE HER OWN WIKIPAGE) THERE ARE ALSO PHOTOS OF OLUNIKÉ WITH HER HUSBAND RAJIV AT PUBLIC CANADIAN & AMERICAN CELEBRITY EVENTS & ALSO OF HER & HER DAUGHTER AT IDENTICAL VENUES. THEIR EXISTENCES, THEIR NAMES & IMPORTANCE IN MS. ADELIYI'S LIFE IS PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE VIA INTERVIEWS, PUBLIC PRINT & PUBLIC PHOTOS. -- SO ... "THANKS" (i.e., "fuck you") FOR BEING SO STUPID & UNINFORMED, "THANKS" FOR BEING A WIKI-NAZI-BOT & RELYING SOLELY ON A MINDLESS COMPUTER PROGRAM TO DO YOUR CHOPPING AUTOMATICALLY INSTEAD OF TAKING THE TIME TO VERIFY THE VALIDITY & TRUTH OF WHAT WAS ADDED TO THE PAGE. AND ... A REALLY BIG "THANKS" FOR MAKING ME WASTE ALMOST 3 FUCKING HOURS OF MY TIME! FIRST, BY REVERTING OR WIPING OUT THE PAGE, WHICH U DESTROYED IN A MATTER OF 2 MINUTES & SECOND, WASTING EVEN MORE OF MY TIME DUE TO HAVING TO WRITE THIS MESSAGE TO U, WHICH U PROBABLY WONT READ. AND, MOST OF ALL, THE BIGGEST "THANKS" GOES OUT TO YOU FOR ABSOLUTELY DESTROYING & RUINING MY AFTERNOON! AGAIN, FUCK YOU, WIKI-NAZI-BOT!! 🖕🖕 LMilagros5472 (talk) 01:31, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

6/25/23 12:49 to 1:05am CA time

Please note the TITLES of these references sited by creator of this page!!!

1. "Video | 10 Questions with Wendy Olunike Adeliyi (Actress, Producer, Philanthropist)". eBOSS Canada. 2017-03-09. Retrieved 2017-03-14.</ref>

"10-questions-with-WENDY-olunike-adeliyi-ACTRESS-PRODUCER-PHILANTHROPIST"

IT CLEARLY STATES HER FULL NAME AS WENDY OLUNIKÉ ADELIYI'S & HER OCCUPATIONS AS: ACTRESS, PRODUCER & PHILANTHROPIST!!

2. Her oldest daughter, Alesha, has appeared in several episodes of the TVOKids series Taste Buds.

"... Her oldest daughter, Alesha ....

ALESHA BAILEY |url=https://www.imdb.com/name/nm45"41756"

CLEARLY & PUBLICLY STATES THE NAME OF HER OLDEST DAUGHTER ... **ACTRESS*** ALESHA BAILEY!! "HEL-LO"!!

WHAT HAVE YOU TO SAY TO THIS, WIKI-NAZI-BOT? LMilagros5472 (talk) 08:05, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Shadow of a Doubt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santa Rosa.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

8/7/23 I checked & doubled checked to make sure I had the CORRECT Wikilink page to the CA city of Santa Rosa. I always click on the links I add after editing to make sure they go the page intended! I will check ... again ... one more time. LMilagros5472 (talk) 16:37, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

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) 00:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

December 2023

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. livelikemusic (TALK!) 01:36, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

12/4/23 Who are you & what the hell are you ranting about? You left NO info as to what page I supposedly added the "controversial" info & when. There is only an IMDb link, of all places, to an "Alesha Bailey " - who I have NEVER heard of! Are you SURE you are screaming at the right person?? LMilagros5472 (talk) 03:59, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

12/4/23. 8:00pm ADDENDUM - Alesha Bailey does NOT have a Wiki page!  ???? LMilagros5472 (talk) 04:01, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 10

An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited Biblical Magi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Epiphany.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:49, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In

I don't know the exact dating, but the joke wall sometimes was a little less prominent, and in the last season they often showed it with all doors open, so everybody behind it was visible... AnonMoos (talk) 17:20, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

8/31/24 You're right about the Joke Wall. The last season was VERY different & things weren't consistent. I'm binge watching the entire series. I haven't seen any of these episodes since 1967 to 1973 -- when I was just 13 ro 19! I'm having a blast! So many memories. However, the show is somewhat different when seeing it with adult eyes. LMilagros5472 (talk) 19:48, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jack Riley.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:56, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

it's been corrected LMilagros5472 (talk) 05:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

New message to LMilagros5472

Friend, the prose on September 11 attacks is fine the way that it is. Consider asking about specific points on the talk page if you have outstanding questions, but specific errors you've pointed out (lacking the alternate longer name which isn't really a distinct name, "capital" instead of "Capitol") aren't actually errors if you take a closer look. Moreover, you're overlinking. Continuing to re-implement your changes after they've been questioned can become disruptive, so please ask on the talk page first. Thanks. Remsense ‥ 论 09:27, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

9/19/24 2:42am 1) DID YOU BOTHER TO GO THE THE US .....***C A P I T O L"*" ... WIKI PAGE I LINKED? THE US GOVT SPELLS IT CAPITOL. D'OH! THE **CAPITOL** OF THE US IS WASH, DC. THE CAPITOL OF CA IS SACRAMENTO. "CAPITAL" REFERS TO LETTERS OF THE ALPHABET & MONEY!!! BUY A DICTIONARY.

2) MOST PPL DONT READ PAST THE 1ST PARAGRAPH/SECTION & PHOTOGRAPH ON WIKI. THEY ARENT THERE TO GET A HISTORY LESSON. JUST A QUICK 30 SECOND READ. AS IVE ALREADY WRITTEN, KIDS & "FOREIGNERS" READ WIKI &, BELIEVE IT IR NOT ... NOT EVERYONE HAS HEARD OF NEW YORK OR CA!! AS WIKI EDITORS, IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVIDE THOSE TYPES OF READERS WITH THAT INFO. IT IS NOT "OVERLINKING"!!! IT IS BEING A RESPONSIBLE TEACHER & JOURNALIST! NO WRITER WORTH THEIR SALT SHOULD EVER ASSUME ANYTHING ABOUT THEIR READERS!!!!

3) IF I THOUGHT THE "PROSE WAS FINE AS IT IS" - THEN I WOULDNT HAVE BOTHERED TO CLEAN IT UP, WOULD I? I HAVE OTHER THINGS TO DO WITH MY TIME! WHEN I SEE THINGS THAT ARE **POORLY WRITTEN**, HAVE MISSING INFO & SPELLING ERRORS – I CORRECT THEM. PERIOD!

4) YOU ARE PROBABLY THE ORIGINAL WRITER OF THE SMALL ... SMALL SECTION I AM TRYING TO CLEAN UP & IMPROVE & YOU JUST DONT LIKE PPL REVISING YOUR WORK.

5) YOU HAVE DIRECTLY THREATENED ME - "continuing to re-implement your changes after they've been questioned." YOU HAVE MADE IT CLEAR YOU ARE THE BOSS & YOU ARE **NEVER** WRONG & YOU HAVE THE FINAL WORD. WHO DIED & MADE YOU THE GOD OF WIKI?

6) I CALL PPL LIKE YOU WIKI NAZIS. I CONSIDER MYSELF LUCKY TO NOT HAVE RUN INTO YOUR TYPE IN 3 YEARS. BUT I KNEW MY LUCK WOULD RUN OUT EVENTUALLY. IT DID TONIGHT. ITS PPL LIKE YOU WHO MAKE WIKI EDITING STRESSFUL & UNPLEASANT.

7) IM TIRED & SHOULDVE BEEN ABLE TO GO TO BED HOURS AGO ... BUT A CERTAIN WIKI NAZI CONTROL FREAK WITH OCD TOOPK CARE OF THAT! . I WAS GOING TO RE-EDIT ONE MORE TIME, BUT WHY SHOULD I? YOULL JUST REVERT EVERYTHING ILL DO BC YOURE GOD. SO,INSTEAD,I'LL BE FILING A CASE OR COMPLAINT OR DISPUTE OR WHATEVER WIKIPEDIA CALLS IT ABOUT THIS UNPLEASANT & UNNECESSARY NONSENSE. (3:27AM HOW TO WASTE A NIGHT) LMilagros5472 (talk) 10:28, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

The only concrete things to say here are: 1) the point of asking you to post on the talk page was not to get my way because I'm always right, but so we can come to mutual consensus with minimal disruption to the article itself, which is what editors do when we disagree—and 2) Washington, D.C. is the capital city of the United States, while the U.S. Capitol is a building located in said capital city. I apologize I didn't make that adequately clear before. Remsense ‥ 论 10:30, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

9/19/24 3:38am

THIS IS WHAT I WROTE ...OF WHICH YOU OBLITERATED THE ENTIRE SENTENCE

"It is believed the intended target was either the Capitol or the White House."

IT HAS THE PROPER USE & PROPER SPELLING OF CAPITOL .. PRIMARILY BC IT IS A DIRECT LINK TO A WIKI PAGE. LMilagros5472 (talk) 10:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Please stop shouting at me. The previous version states that the next two flights [were aimed] toward targets in or near Washington, D.C., in an attack on the nation's capital., which is also correct. Generally, unconfirmed or hypothetical specifics or anything but concrete facts or analysis thereof are considered less crucial information for inclusion in an article's lead section, which is part of why I prefer the previous version. We know for sure both planes were headed for Washington, and that's sufficient for the lead; the body of the article contains more detail if one wishes to know more. It's true that many only read the lead section, but space is not free and I largely agree with what details are given in the existing version. If you disagree, that's what the talk page is for.Remsense ‥ 论 10:48, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

9/19/24 3:51AM - 4;26AM

(YOUVE SENT ME A ZILLION MESSAGES BUT WHEN I CLICKED ON 4 OF THEM T ALL I SAW WAS SOME WIERD LOOKING STATS ABOUT YOU. HUH?) I USE ALL CAPS BC ITS EASIER FOR ME. I AM ALMOST KEGALLY BLIND & IT US V E R Y DIFFICULT TO SEE LETTERS THAT ARE LESS THAN 2 INCHES TALL.

☆☆☆

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HIJACKING MY TIME ... & WASTING MY TIME ... & RUINIMG MY NIGHT. I SURE AS HELL DiDNT PLAN ON PISSING AWAY 3 OR 4 HOURS JUST FOR EDITING 1 PHRASE & 1 SENTENCE! JESUS!

As FOR THOSE 1 OR 2 SENTENCES NO. THE WAY THEY ARE WRITTEN IS *NOT" OK - OR I WOUKDNT HAVE BOTHERED TO CORRECT THEM!

FOR THE PAST 23 YRS IVE READ PROBABLY 1000 ARTICLES ON 9/11 .. ALSO CALLED BY EVERYONE ON TV THE SEPT 11TH ***TERRORIST** ATTACKS (COMMON U.S. VERBAGE, IN OTHER WORDS). EXPERTS WHO HAVE STUDIED THAT DAY CONCLUDE FLIGHT 93 WAS HEADED FOR THE CAPITOL OR THE WHITE HOUSE SINCE 9/11 LAST WEEK IVE WATCHED A ZILLION REPUTABLE DOCUMENTARIES & READ NEW, REPUTABLE 2024 ARTICLES & STILL, AFTER THE 9/11 COMMISSION, THE CONSENSUS IS RIGHT UP TO THIS VERY SECOND THAT FL 93 WAS TO HIT EITHER THE WHITE HOUSE OR THE CAPITOL. THE MAMBY PAMBY & INCORRECT & NOW OUTDATED ORIGINAL PARAGRAPH .... " two flights [were aimed] toward targets in or near Washington, D.C., in an attack on the nation's capital.," IS JUST THAT - INCORRECT & OUTDATED. THAT PARAGRAPH ALMOST MAKES IT SOUND LIKE THE PLANE WAS WANDERING AIMLESSLY IN SEARXH OF A TARGET.

WELL, MY CONSCIENCE IS CLEAR. I DID MY BEST TO CORRECT SPELLING ERRORS, CORRECT OUTDATED INFO & PROVIDE LINKS FOR THE "FIRST PARAGRAPHERS". AS I CALL THEM.

BUT YOURE HELLBENT ON GETTING YOUR WAY. SO BE IT.

YOU'VE WON (TIL I APPEAL) . BUT ... **YOU** HAVE TO LIVE WITH YOURSELF FOR ALLOWING THE CRAPPY INFO THAT IS WRITTEN TO REMAIN. THATS ALL ON YOU.

GOOD BUE! IVE HAD ENOUGH.

ENJOY YOUR VICTORY. LMilagros5472 (talk) 11:26, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

@LMilagros5472 I'll say this once before I take it to WP:ANI as Remsense is showing you a great deal of patience. Firstly, please take off your caps lock and type normally. See WP:SHOUTING.

Secondly, comments like I CALL PPL LIKE YOU WIKI NAZIS and A CERTAIN WIKI NAZI CONTROL FREAK WITH OCD are unacceptable. They're personal attacks. If you on unable to collaberate with other editors calmly then you're going to find yourself blocked.

I'LL BE FILING A CASE OR COMPLAINT OR DISPUTE See WP:BOOMERANG. — Czello ^(music) 11:27, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Barbara Rush, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Broadway.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:52, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cuíca, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Holy Cross.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

I corrected the Wikilink for "Holy Cross" on Tues Oct 22, 2024. ☆☆☆ In my "defense", that Wiki page is INCORRECTLY TITLED. The CORRECT title should be "Feast Of The Holy Cross", not the current "Feast of the Cross." What or which cross? The specific word "Holy" in the title of this feast day is essential. LMilagros5472 (talk) 07:31, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

"Disambiguation"???

10/22/24 10:59 pm PDT I really dont know how to use this page. 1. The disambiguation mistake for Barbara Rush was CORRECTED a long time ago!! I was interrupted while editing & forgot to check to makesure it was a valid link. I CORRECTED IT!!! 2. The wikilink to the Holy Cross feast day IS A VALID LINK. I checked ALL Wikilinks I made for that page before finishing editing!!! I will check again.  :-/ LMilagros5472 (talk) 06:05, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

DISAMBIGUATION

Double checked .. For the page on actress Barbara Rush I CORRECTED THE LINK TO "BROADWAY" BACK ON OCTV11 24. The ink takes people to the Wikinpagebtitled "Broadway theatre". It is NOT a "disambiguation page! LMilagros5472 (talk) 07:15, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Double checked .. For the page on actress Barbara Rush I CORRECTED THE LINK TO "BROADWAY" BACK ON OCT 11 2024. The link takes readers to the Wiki page titled "Broadway theatre" & a page about the real & genuine BROADWAY & its many theatres. The link I added is NOT to a "disambiguation page"! LMilagros5472 (talk) 07:23, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

DISAMBIGUATION

Corrected Wikilink to FEAST OF THE CROSS. ☆☆ The title of this page is actually INCORRECT. The CORRECT title for this feast day is "FEAST OF THE HOLY CROSS." LMilagros5472 (talk) 07:19, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

October 2024

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Mulatto, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. –DMartin 04:43, 24 October 2024 (UTC)