Naterybner

Naterybner, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Naterybner! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like AmaryllisGardener (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

October 2016

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 23:26, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the info, I will be sure to use it in the future!

Nate Rybner 23:33, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Oklahoma Historical Organization Website

A tag has been placed on Template:Oklahoma Historical Organization Website requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is an unused duplicate of another template, or a hard-coded instance of another template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is not actually the same as the other template noted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page explaining how this one is different so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page's talk page, where you can 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 removed 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. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 02:23, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

November 2016

Hello, I'm Parsley Man. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Wheelock Church have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Parsley Man (talk) 02:27, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Hey dude! By the way, the link is to the Oklahoma HistoriCal society, so I thought it appropriate based on the churches age, and status. If you find it fit, I'd put it back, but your choice!

Nate Rybner 12:28, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Black Lives Matter

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Black Lives Matter. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. — MShabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 13:15, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Hey, just saw your page, and just to let you know I'm of Ashekenzi Jewish heritage, and hAve been bar mitzvah(ed). My dad came to America from Israel on his ninth birthday. Back to the topic, my edit was legitamately a sentence that I thought could be added to provide less bias in the contreverial topic. Ill leave it be, but I'd prefer if you read what I put, and I messaged the person that deleted it, and they didn't really give me a intelligible response other than "vandalism". So I left a comment on their page, which they deleted. So I believe they were either having a bad day and just wasn't in the mood or something, because it was the least biased thing anyone could have put. The "White Lives Matter" in Britain part is probably less necessary than my addition, because the movement is primarily and situated in the United States. Thank you for giving me more insight on Wiki Rules!

Nate Rybner 16:56, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mat Chapman

Greetings. I have gone ahead and completed the nomination on your behalf, again. (No, I'm not following you around--in both cases I had encountered your nominations because I had seen them pop up at User:Cyberbot I/AfD report, a page maintained by a bot which looks for problematic AfD situations.)

As I noted previously, a properly-formatted AfD nomination requires several step, not all of which you have been following:

1. Tagging the page.
2. Creation of the deletion discussion page using the proper template, which ensures that eesential links are included. This had not been done.
3. Transclusion of the discussion to a daily log page which ensures that people who follow AfD discussions in general will see it. This had not been done.
4. Notification of the article creator (and possibly other major contributors) on their user talk page. This last time, you put the notice on their user page instead. (I've moved it to the talk page).

All of this is on WP:AFDHOWTO, to which I had directed you earlier, and I would advise you to read that page in detail if you have not done so already.

I appreciate your efforts to improve the encyclopedia, and I have had no problem cleaning things up so far, but in the future if I see that you have done an AfD nomination and not followed all of the steps (especially if I think it's a slam-dunk "keep" situation like the danah boyd article was), I will be inclined to simply revert your tag rather than fill in all of the missed steps. Feel free to ask further questions, and thank you for your time. --Finngall ^talk 17:20, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

December 2016

Hello, I'm Shearonink. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Ron Paul, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Shearonink (talk) 19:42, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Shearonink. Your recent edit to the page Ron Paul appears to have added incorrect information, so I have removed it for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Shearonink (talk) 19:42, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

I apologize. I had seen it on social media and wondered why nobody had changed it. It was on more than one post, it was filling my feed.

Nate Rybner 07:13, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

May 2017

Hello, I'm The Diaz. I noticed that you made a change to an article, White genocide conspiracy theory, 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. THE DIAZ ^{talk • contribs} 12:59, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

January 2018

I noticed that you tagged the page Gostynin Land for speedy deletion with the reason "Author of Article did not provide source, and seems to just to be a subtopic of another article. Note: Author has not been on wikipedia in over a year.". However, "Author of Article did not provide source, and seems to just to be a subtopic of another article. Note: Author has not been on wikipedia in over a year." is not currently one of our criteria for speedy deletion, so I have removed the speedy deletion tag. You can propose the page for deletion if it appears to be an uncontroversial matter, or take the page to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion for discussion on the merits if you still seek deletion. Thanks! Iffy★Chat -- 11:57, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Notices

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Acroterion (talk) 04:48, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

June 2020

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

A correct signature includes links as described at WP:SIGLINK. David Biddulph (talk) 14:14, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Problem with your custom signature

You have a custom signature set in your account preferences. A change to Wikipedia's software has made your current custom signature incompatible with the software.

The problem: Your preferences are set to interpret your custom signature as wikitext. However, your current custom signature does not contain any wikitext.

The solutions: You can reset your signature to the default, or you can fix your signature.

Solution 1: Reset your signature to the default:

1. Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
2. Uncheck the box (☑︎→☐) that says "Treat the above as wiki markup."
3. Remove anything in the Signature: text box. (It might already be empty.)
4. Click the blue "Save" button at the bottom of the page. (The red "Restore all default settings" button will reset all of your preference settings, not just the signature.)

Solution 2: Fix your custom signature:

1. Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
2. Uncheck the box (☑︎→☐) that says "Treat the above as wiki markup."
3. Click the blue "Save" button at the bottom of the page.

More information about custom signatures is available at Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing how everyone sees your signature. If you have followed these instructions and still want help, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Signatures. 19:04, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

"It ended up being proven," you say

No evidence has been found that members of the left-wing antifa movement were involved in this week’s storming of the Capitol building, the FBI said Friday, contradicting a narrative pushed by some Trump allies

Meanwhile...Members of the anti-government paramilitary Oath Keepers and neo-fascist Proud Boys groups were indicted on conspiracy charges for allegedly staging planned missions in the Capitol

Just sayin' soibangla (talk) 00:58, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Wrong!

[1] [2]

The first man who brought on the breach was proven to be a left wing activist.

Nate Rybner 06:23, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Nope

Appearing on CNN on January 23 to argue that the Trump rally did not incite the siege of the Capitol, John C. Eastman asserted that "a paramilitary group as well as antifa groups" had been organizing "three or four days ahead of time." Eastman asserted this had been reported by The Washington Post days earlier, though the article he appeared to reference did not support his assertion and did not mention antifa. The FBI had announced two weeks earlier there was no evidence of antifa involvement in the siege. Eastman referred to an "antifa and BLM guy" who had been arrested after the Capitol incursion, an apparent reference to a Utah man who some characterized as an "antifa leader" who had supposedly infiltrated the rally crowd to instigate the insurgency. Federal authorities had not identified the man as a member of antifa. Black Lives Matter Utah had for months disassociated itself from the man on concerns he might be associated with the Proud Boys.

From your source:

In encrypted chats among left-leaning activists, organizers routinely flag posts by Sullivan to new members, saying, “Don’t trust that guy” and, pointing to his past ties with the Proud Boys, “He’s a double agent.”

soibangla (talk) 19:55, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for removing the far-right rag on nick fuentes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Based47 (talk • contribs) 10:07, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

March 2021

Your recent edits to Nick Fuentes could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. GorillaWarfare (talk) 16:11, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Signature

Per WP:CUSTOMSIG/P, your signature must contain a link to your user talk page (i.e. this page). I notice you received an automated message in September 2020 which may explain why this is, if your signature used to have such a link. Feel free to ask me if you have technical questions about fixing this. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) — Bilorv (talk) 00:28, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Controversial topic area alerts

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. — Newslinger talk 07:24, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. — Newslinger talk 07:24, 15 March 2021 (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) 00:48, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Custom signature fix needed

Hi there! You have a custom signature set in your account preferences. Changes to Wikipedia's software have made your current custom signature invalid.

The problem: Your signature contains a syntax error or obsolete HTML tags.

The solutions: You can reset your signature to the default, you can fix your signature, or you can do nothing.

Solution 1: Reset your signature to the default:

1. Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
2. Uncheck the box (☑︎→☐) that says "Treat the above as wiki markup."
3. Remove anything in the Signature: text box.
4. Click the blue "Save" button at the bottom of the page. (Do not click the red "Restore all default settings" button, which will reset all of your preference settings, not just the signature.)

Solution 2: Fix your custom signature:

1. Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
2. Click the Learn more button next to the error to learn how to fix the error.
3. Update your signature to fix the error.
4. Click Save to update to your newly fixed signature.

Solution 3: Do nothing:

1. In accordance with a recent request for comment, all invalid signatures will be changed to the default, which looks like "Example (talk)", one month from now.

If you have followed these instructions and still want help, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Signatures. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:05, 2 February 2024 (UTC)