User talk:Serols/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

→

Archive 10

Move request

A request to change the title and content of a comics article has begun at Talk:X-Men (film series)#Requested move 7 April 2017. Any interested WikiProject:Comics editor may comment there within one week. --Tenebrae (talk) 02:13, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

William Still article, link to brother.

Dunno if it belongs exactly where it is, as further reading without note that it is about a sibling, but I dunno if it needs simple nuking, either. Anmccaff (talk) 16:48, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello Anmccaff, I saw it, but the link was at the wrong place and weblinks are more than enough. Regards --Serols (talk) 10:20, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

"Oleh Husyev" or "Oleg Gusyev"?

His Ukrainian name says "Oleg Anatoliyovych Gusyev", that's why I wanted to change his name from "Oleh" to "Oleg". Yes, I know that Ukrainian people pronounce "g" as "h", but still, in Russian language in the same article it's still written "Oleg Anatoliyovych Gusyev", and even in the news they write "Oleg Gusyev" instead of "Oleh Husyev". But you changed that, and wrote me a message about it. So I wanted to ask you: is it "Oleh Husyev" or "Oleg Gusyev"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.243.96.46 (talk) 14:21, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello 80.243.96.46, please accept the article-name - thanks. Regards --Serols (talk) 14:24, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Mitochondial Eve revert

Per your note on my Talk page, please explain your rationale for reverting the "clarification needed" edit.

That final passage is not clear as written. How would you like me to rephrase my enquiry within the clarification needed hatnote? Yours, 24.61.220.85 (talk) 14:46, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Whoooah! You've not just reverted that, you've reverted all the rest of my constructive edits. I will restore them. Take it to Talk to explain any improvements you'd like to make to them. Yours, 24.61.220.85 (talk) 14:50, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello 24.61.220.85, comments and questions please use the talk-page, not in the article. Regards --Serols (talk) 14:54, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Hey, not so fast: You specifically told me on my Talk page to respond here at your Talk page. What gives, and what gives with the reverts? Yours, 24.61.220.85 (talk) 14:56, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

If you are referring to my use of the "clarification needed" hatnote, that is how it is designed to be used. The passage is not clear; I explained what was needed to improve it so that it would be. Yours, 24.61.220.85 (talk) 14:58, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello 24.61.220.85, please do not leave comments in any article and questions, use the talk page. --Serols (talk) 15:04, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

I just explained that to you, and you're being mighty stubborn about it: I did not leave "Talk page" comments in article space. How would you like me to be clearer for you? That's how that template is used. Yours, 24.61.220.85 (talk) 15:58, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello 24.61.220.85, annoying, also for me. Have only registered the question - sorry for my revert. Regards --Serols (talk) 16:48, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

question

Hi. I wanted to edit a page but it didn't go well and I couldn't add what I wanted. How do you add a picture while using a smartphone? JudieLn (talk) 15:16, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello JudieLn, I believe it`s not possible with a smartphone, only with a pc -> this ist the site you can do it - Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard. Regards --Serols (talk) 15:26, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Arun Vijay

Hi Serols Thanks for reverting the article Arun Vijay to its earlier version. People have been trying to edit articles by incorporating their personal opinions. It is nice to see that editors like you have been vigilant. Thanks for your help. Kavinsp (talk) 16:10, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello Kavinsp, thank you. Best wishes --Serols (talk) 14:49, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

1947

I'm not sure if I am doing this right but here goes. I added "the US" after New York City because that appears consistent with the page: Paris, France; Berlin, Germany. Personally I don't think there's a need for country names as these when it's obvious, but if done for one it should be done for all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.82.184.126 (talk) 15:11, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello 115.82.184.126, please stop immediately. --Serols (talk) 15:20, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) And did you also think "Negro" was a better word than "African American", 115.82.184.126, "pres" a better word than "president", "splosion" better than "explosion", etc etc? Don't play games. Bishonen | talk 15:26, 12 April 2017 (UTC).

I edited a page without knowing apparently?

I got a message as soon as I created my account saying that I edited a "Birthstone" wiki page? I haven't edited any sections in this account up to the point where I got the message. I still haven't edited anything. Could you clear this confusion? Is this happening to anyone else? — Preceding unsigned comment added by V8xl50 (talk • contribs) 16:46, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello V8xl50, welcome to Wikipedia.Sorry, but is a question for an administrator - I hope this is the right site for your question - Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Best wishes --Serols (talk) 07:53, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Enterotoxin B

Please undo your recent reversion to the article Enterotoxin B. The material that was deleted did not refer to Staphylococcal enterotoxin B, but rather referred to toxic shock syndrome toxin another distinct toxin produced by Staphylococcus aureus. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.209.57.113 (talk) 15:45, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello 141.209.57.113, you deleted the info-box. Make your edit without deleting the info-box. Regards --Serols (talk) 15:53, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Religious views of Adolph Hitler

Please see the talk page before reverting this page. I see that you are a vandalism hunter, but you still need to review the situation before performing reverts unless they are OBVIOUSLY vandalism. Just reverting people is not productive, though it does pump up your contribution count. 2602:304:788B:DF50:8CDD:5461:389A:631B (talk) 17:39, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello 2602:304:788B:DF50:8CDD:5461:389A:631B, I saw too late your edit on the talk-page, but I saw this -> sorry for my revert. Regards --Serols (talk) 17:47, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

All good, happy hunting, I despise vandals too. 2602:304:788B:DF50:8CDD:5461:389A:631B (talk) 17:53, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello 2602:304:788B:DF50:8CDD:5461:389A:631B, thanks for understanding. Regards --Serols (talk) 17:55, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Why?

Please write this normally. --Serols (talk) 07:29, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

What's normal to you? Do you mean modify the title the source uses to use First letter Uppper case and then lowercase etc...? Thank you, for the clarification, it's difficult to read minds :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lelatanks457 (talk • contribs) 07:40, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I'm going to assume you meant sentence case and have made the change, now please stop reverting me! Lelatanks457 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:47, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello Lelatanks457, now everything is fine. Regards --Serols (talk) 07:52, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Soner Cagaptay

Please undo your recent reversion to the page on Soner Cagaptay. The edits made were to clean up the appearance of the page and add recent articles and websites by the scholar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Turkish research (talk • contribs) 14:36, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello Turkish research, no amazon-links - no social-links -> see Wikipedia:Weblinks. --Serols (talk) 14:40, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Help desk

Thanks for reverting your revert. As I stated at the helpdesk, I am willing to confirm my identity by email. I just thought posting with my username might inflame things further as the discussion I refer to got a bit nasty. 86.135.189.159 (talk) 14:46, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello 86.135.189.159, sorry, I have only mistyped. Regards --Serols (talk) 14:51, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

battery swap

Hi Serols,

I am adding in overlooked information on electric vehicle charging infrastrucutre operator & on a type of battery swap station not yet included in this entry. It exists, works, and is important information to include on the topic. It is also sourced with footnotes. Thank youAfishbone (talk) 15:41, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello Afishbone, can you help me with a link? Regards --Serols (talk) 15:47, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Serols, sure, what link are you interested in? Aaron — Preceding unsigned comment added by Afishbone (talk • contribs) 16:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Emerald Theatre post-merger edits

Pursuant to assistance with the merger of Macomb Music Theatre page into the Emerald Theatre page by administrator Diannaa, I was cleaning up the Emerald Theatre page post-merge. I am new to the process and thought I was doing this properly. Can you tell me what the issue is which resulted in the reversion?Dhp31 (talk) 18:12, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello Dhp31, you deleted the info-box, but I have not seen that this was double - and now see here. Best wishes --Serols (talk) 18:30, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

To give you background, the Merger was proposed and reached consensus because there were duplicate pages for the same venue, a historic theater. It has had several names over the years, and is currently the Emerald Theatre (as of 2016, but also known by that name from 2000 - 2012). It was known as the Macomb Music Theatre only briefly from 2012-2014, and it would appear that the historical information was merged from the Emerald page to the Macomb Music Theatre page in 2012, leaving the Emerald page with a statement that the venue is closed. Since it is actively operating as the Emerald Theatre now, the merged information has to be cleaned up. I was following the instructions given by the administrator, but have not finished. After saving the Emerald Theatre edits, I am to add the merge notations into the talk pages of the articles. Does this explanation suffice as to the relevance of my edits? Dhp31 (talk) 18:38, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello Dhp31, the explanation is more than sufficient - thank you. Regards --Serols (talk) 18:42, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Royal Army Pay Corps edits rejected

The RAPC Regimental Association was an integral part of the Royal Army Pay Corps and continues to be so for thousands of veterans. Any item on the Corps and in particular this item needs to recognise this and provide links to the single most authoritative source of RAPC history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.10.190.196 (talk) 18:21, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello 82.10.190.196, the first part is the wrong place and no links in the flow-text - see Wikipedia:Weblinks. Regards --Serols (talk) 18:27, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Tydfil

Hi there, it would help if you read the "source" - it's just someone's hobby website with huge inaccuracies (and the content makes clear a bias towards Welsh nationalism). Tydfil is not a male name, and has never been, for example, that's obvious to anyone in Wales! 80.234.189.32 (talk) 16:20, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello 80.234.189.32, your edit was correct. Regards --Serols (talk) 06:57, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into your local language via meta

The 2016 Cure Award

In 2016 you were one of the top ~200 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.

Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

User talk:Claas de wael

I have reverted your warning. User is just trying to source the thing. Perhaps if we were to read carefully and engage editors, we could bite them less. Adding this <ref>The documentary History of The State of New-York, Vol 1, 1850</ref> is clearly not vandalism. Dlohcierekim 18:35, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello Dloh, normally you get the message that this user is the article creator , this time unfortunately not. I would not have made this warning. Regards --Serols (talk) 18:59, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Huggle

is a wonderful tool. However, you have made 250 edits in < 2 hours. I recommend that you 1) slow down and 2) take a break. When we try to do too much too fast, we make more errors. Dlohcierekim 18:45, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

It is rather regrettable that there is so much vandalism. --Serols (talk) 19:02, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

My edit on Galamsey

I am adding a link to a page that shows a study that was conducted on galamsey. However, you keep removing. May I know why? DrDartey (talk) 10:36, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello DrDartey, no blog-links - see Wikipedia:Weblinks. Regards --Serols (talk) 10:42, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Alright . Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrDartey (talk • contribs) 10:47, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Social justice

You removed my edit to Social Justice because it did not have citations. I added citations and was then accused of vandalism?????? What is with that?????

Hello Jole66, see here. Regards --Serols (talk) 15:50, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

John Poo Beresford

I really recommend Wikipedia:IPs are human too, it's a salutatory read. And then have a look at the edit you reverted a bit more closely. In your vandal fighting I think you've made a mistake here, and should self-revert both your revert, and the templated warning you gave me. 77.96.115.80 (talk) 16:02, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello 77.96.115.80, see here. Regards --Serols (talk) 16:19, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Truman revert

I'm sorry that I mistakenly referred to your edit as "vandalism." I somehow thought that you had removed the period instead of adding it. Display name 99 (talk) 15:46, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello Display name 99, no problem, problem, something like that can happen. Regards --Serols (talk) 15:58, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Shall I template you?

Please stop reverting my edits, restoring unsourced, non notables, and the bedbug vandalism, and issuing warnings to me. Thank you, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 17:53, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63, the delete large parts of the range Athletics looked like vandalism and your edits are between vandalism-edits - sorry. Regards --Serols (talk) 18:01, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

federicus

Hello serlos, thank you for your interest I've edited the page with the most truthful possible changes to reality. I write with due knowledge to divulge as much as possible a phenomenon that devastates my country, I and other people have received association threats that I cite on the page, so I can not subscribe, and it's fair that wikipedia is reported to the truth And not propaganda so that foreigners who give money to these people know these things in the pure sense of sharing the truth. The original page was made to publicize an event that deserves no attention except the law.If you can not delete the page, which advertises malevolent phenomena, at least I ask you to leave it with as truthful as possible. Thank you for your time — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.50.2.174 (talk) 15:43, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello 151.50.2.174, thank you for your detailed comment on my talk-page, but your edit is not very helpful. Please let it be - thank you. Regards --Serols (talk) 16:08, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Morbid a love story removal of music credits?

I know the director and writer who credited me with three songs in the movie that were not listed on wiki. I just emailed him and he said he never put up the page on wiki but it should have been included so I added those songs and they were promptly removed... Why? Michaeldante74 (talk) 16:44, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello Michaeldante74, your links were on the wrong place -> References, right place -> External links. But allowed are only five links by external links. You add the same link twice, this is also not allowed. Regards --Serols (talk) 17:00, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Python vandalism

I removed vandalism (actually a misplaced feature request) on the Python page, and it got reverted. Not inspiring confidence here, guys. 2601:8C:4500:7BFF:E945:AE75:A005:7D22 (talk) 15:36, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello 2601:8C:4500:7BFF:E945:AE75:A005:7D22, I was too late, but see here. Regards --Serols (talk) 15:41, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Hohlgangsanlage 8

Hi, you have reverted my changes to Hohlgangsanlage 8. I have only updated the name as the official name of the establishment is no longe Hohlgangsanlage 8, but Jersey War Tunnels. This comes as a request from the place itself as it is not correct anymore to be reffered to as Hohlgangsanlage 8.

Comment added by Rekawilson (talk

Hello Rekawilson, please accept the article-name, or create a new article with Jersey War Tunnels and redirect from Hohlgangsanlage 8 to Jersey War Tunnels. Please use also references and read Hohlgangsanlage tunnels, Jersey. Regards --Serols (talk) 15:03, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Blocked for edit-warring

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

You repeatedly edit-warred with the IP on edits like this one — you restored non-neutral content from primary sources, such as news reports, and you did it repeatedly. You must use secondary sources: primary sources such as news reports cannot provide a long-term sense of material's importance. Nyttend (talk) 15:02, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello Nyttend, this was not an edit-war. I have requested the side blocking. See also the history. --Serols (talk) 15:27, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

You did five reversions in less than twenty minutes: you went way past 3RR. Kindly read the definition of edit-warring before making such blatantly wrong statements. Nyttend (talk) 17:25, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello Oshwah, do you have a few minutes for me? I need a second opinion. I was blocked because of edit-war and I would like to ask you for a check if the lock was correct.

Here are the facts: It was about the article Andy Lewis (performer) - here the history. Three different Ip´s have deleted whole sections without sufficient explanation or references, so I deleted all edits and left a message on their talk-page: 1, 2 and 3 - without reaction, neither on the talk page nor on the discussion page of the article. When it was too much for me, I have applied for a side block. The result: I was blocked for 24 hours.

The comment: "You did five reversions in less than twenty minutes".

I have the impression that the facts were not examined. We both often fight together against vandalism, so you know that this comment is absolute nonsense. I find this block unjust and would like to ask you to check, if I am right. Thanks in advance for your help. Best wishes and have a nice day --Serols (talk) 11:47, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Serols. Sure, I'll be happy to take a look at this and give you input. This diff here shows the content that was being reverted repeatedly. Reading trough the content, I believe that it has a few problems. Not only does much of it violate WP:NPOV, but most of it is completely unreferenced (the content that is referenced mostly point to YouTube videos). I believe that removing the content was not only justified, but I'd argue that removing it was a good call. However, being a vandal fighter for over 9 years now, I completely understand where this removal would set off your "red flags" pretty loudly; it's a lot of content that was removed, and the edit summaries provided could be read as WP:IDONTLIKEIT (which is something I see frequently). I completely understand how you'd believe that what you were doing was fixing vandalism. I catch myself running into these bushes occasionally too.

It looks like you're appealing your block, which is good. The disruption has stopped, and I know you well enough to place your "flight risk" at a very low level. I endorse unblocking despite my findings that support the content being removed. I must also be understanding and give the benefit of the doubt when it can be done. In this case, doing so is easy. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you. Cheers -- ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:09, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Ah, never mind... it looks like your block has already expired. Either way, welcome back ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:35, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello Oshwah, many thanks for your very detailed answer, but my question, whether the block was justified, is unfortunately still not answered. Your opinion would have been important to me, since I appreciate you and your work at wikipedia very much, but I understand it, if you do not want to answer that. Thank you and cheers --Serols (talk) 15:47, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Serols - My apologies; I'll be happy to answer that question, too. I didn't realize that this was the underlying question that you wanted answered...

Was the block placed on your account an action / result that was justified? It depends on how you define justified. If it were me that had run into this very situation, I would have warned both users that they've broken 3RR and told them to stop it first. If the edit warring continued despite the warning I left, then I would have blocked. When asked if an action on wiki was "justified", I define that as an action that was performed within policy and based off of a valid situation that would call for its use. While I definitely would have handled the situation differently and resorted to blocking after trying to get the editors to stop first, the block placed on your account was done so appropriately, within Wikipedia's blocking policy, in a preventative measure, and in response to an event/situation where blocking is an appropriate way to stop it. I hope this answers your questions and explains my thought-process in-depth. Please let me know if you have any more questions. Cheers, mate! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:28, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello Oshwah, please excuse that I have expressed myself so complicated. I've done everything to stop the edit-war, with the result that I was blocked for it. Actually, I want to help Wikipedia to curb the vandalism and not to annoy me.

Oshwa, I would like to thank you very much - for your answers and your time, which have aroused for me. Best wishes --Serols (talk) 15:48, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Of course; any time you need it, Serols. You're one of our major recent-changes patrollers - you do a lot of work and you put a lot of time into keeping it patrolled. Yeah, being on the other side of a block like this is definitely a discouraging feeling (especially given the amount and extent of the muck that we have to shovel on a regular basis), but I honestly wouldn't worry about it too much. We all make mistakes and things happen. Just keep doing what you do, take note to skim over the content that someone is either adding or removing before you revert, and you'll be absolutely fine and this block (in a worst case scenario) is easily explained to others as a learning opportunity. No big deal at all :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:40, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Serols (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

UTRS appeal #18355 was submitted on May 23, 2017 12:36:35. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 12:36, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Prost!

		A beer on me!
		Serols, I do hope you will soon return to Recent Changes patrol. You have been a real asset to Wikipedia.– Gilliam (talk) 03:53, 26 May 2017 (UTC)