User talk:Herostratus

I will usually respond to your messages here unless otherwise requested.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8

Or ... Wakefield Order Word? Wakeword? Field Order! etc

Holey Moley ... I really really hate to disagree with an editor of your knowledge and experience. I go back a little while too – somewhat more than it looks on this account – and I am well aware of your editing, and, if you like, your wiki-status in some way I don't quite have the brains or temerity to define. So I feel a bit cheeky turning up here without an appointment and just handing my visiting-card to your butler.

The trouble is, I am in that most tiresome situation: that of thinking I am right, or at least probably right, or kind-of right, or something close(ish) to it. Now, I am a State Registered Coward™ when it comes to a fight, argument, mild disagreement or really anything other than universal love and peace and, pace the amusing picture addition, I am pretty disinclined to pick up the sabres or cudgels or load the cannon over this. So I might just leave it, while thanking you for the polite and well-reasoned intervention. I mean ... I'd sort of quite like to engage further with this issue, but my desire to do so is running somewhere around that tricky 48/52% split level. And no-one will die if I don't, and the world will not become a much more stupid place whichever way it goes. So I might go back and have another bash, but please do not hold your breath, which would not be conducive to good health. Or I might just leave it, and thank you again, and wish you a pleasant evening or whatever works well in your time-zone. With all good wishes, DBaK (talk) 19:13, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but there are so many experts! Google "green great dragon".

Here is a column about a book by one Mark Forsyth where he describes it. Forsyth Rule then? (I'm not finding anything about Wakfield... of course I have not made a great long detailed complete search. Or rather, a detailed complete great long search I have not. Made. I don't suppose inflected languages have this problem?

I am going to bring this up at WP:MOS posthaste. We can't simply have this... and we also simply can't have this. Else chaos.

Thank you for the compliment, I'm not sure I have any wiki-status, but OK. Herostratus (talk) 19:55, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I started a thread at MOS Talk, God help me. Herostratus (talk) 20:26, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But ... but ... I don't want to fight ... I don't want to fight ... aaargh must not look ... must not loooook :) DBaK (talk) 21:54, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But it only takes one side to make a war. Anyway the MOS talk page is source of amusement rather than enlightenment for me anyway, thanks partly to the presence of User:EEng. Herostratus (talk) 21:58, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We each have our station in life. EEng 23:42, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for File:Statue of Elvis Presley at age 13.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Statue of Elvis Presley at age 13.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:File copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 15:45, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can i talk you in WhatsApp? R8dikal (talk) 11:46, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have WhatsApp. Can you email me? Herostratus (talk) 12:41, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

... for what you said on User talk:SlimVirgin - missing pictured on my talk, with music full of hope and reformation --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:15, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thanks. Herostratus (talk) 17:23, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are recipient no. 2623 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank you. Herostratus (talk) 02:47, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My characterization of your multipart question was blunt and aimed at the question, not the questioner. The issue is a fair one. I trust that in several years, I'll come back around to answering this question again, and while my personal choice is now explicit (and I will abide by it, AGF dude!), I suspect the community will have a say as well in how long and under what circumstances an admin holds the bit. Right now the system doesn't appear broken (arguably). Appreciate your boldness in raising the issue. BusterD (talk) 16:46, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2022 FIFA World Cup on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:34, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Alex Jones on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

—usernamekiran (talk) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. No particular reason, just wanted to say thank you for your contributions. But I think you should really really archive your talkpage —usernamekiran (talk) 18:26, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply] To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Mmmm, torte! Herostratus (talk) 18:58, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I removed your comment at ARC, because even in the edited state your comment was well below the bar of NPA. --In actu (Guerillero) ^{Parlez Moi} 14:02, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right, well, User:Guerillero that's your job, and maybe you're right, so fine. I don't agree, but I could be wrong. My take is that I would think that the grand jury (sort of what this is) needs info, not people pulling their punches to be polite. If you or the arbs want to discount my material on the ground that's it's false, or at any rate too general or insufficiently documented to be worth considering, fine; but that's not what happened, it was rejected on the grounds of being rude. That's way different. Sure we should be polite generally, but this is different: we are trying to get to the bottom of something, here. If they guy didn't want to be spoken to as a Dutch uncle, well, he didn't have to create a whole problem in the first place and then drag it to ArbCom. ArbCom is not supposed to be anybody's Safe Space, I thought, and you know: Heat, kitchen.

On the other hand, yes, you have a lot more experience on that page than I, so maybe riding herd on tone issues is really important. Anyway, right or wrong, thank you for your service, sound like kind of a thankless job. Carry on! Herostratus (talk) 15:35, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:1960 New York mid-air collision on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2021 review/Issues on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have gotten out a bit ahead of your skis. I find your disregard of your fellow editors to be insulting, if not simply short-sighted. People with whom you disagree edit here and they can make valid arguments. Perhaps you should have emphasized which policies you think are germane and then assert that guys like me aren't making policy-based arguments. Because when you do what you did, it rankles and I lose what respect I used to have for you. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) Chris Troutman (talk) 19:52, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I hear you. Herostratus (talk) 19:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Received your email, but prefer not to respond and disclose mine. Since you indicated you were OK with talk page messages, responding here. I think your plan is a good one and will help him focus upon his return as I imagine he'd be somewhat topic banned in the problematic areas. As I mentioned on his talk, I have accepted his apology and would not stand in the way of the block being lifted. Star Mississippi 21:01, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, great, thanks. We'll see how it goes. Herostratus (talk) 09:55, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Herostratus,

Please feel free to reproduce my reply here in full on JPL's talk page, as I am away atm and unable to login on-wiki at this time. First, thank you for your note and sorry it has taken me over a day to get back to you. While this matter is a high priority for me, I am also exceptionally busy right now with a number of pressing RL tasks.

I'd like to start off by saying that I am committed to protecting JPL from harassment as much as I am protecting others from him harassing them (in equal measures). If there's a solid plan to resolve this amicably by charting a path for JPL's return (which looks to be the case), from my perspective, that would be ideal. I tried to digest Awilley's and Amakuru's thoughts and ultimately found both comments to be reasonable and wise. I realize that Awilley (ping please) may be involved, but Amakuru (ping please): if your conclusion is that the threshold for a conditional unblock has been met, you have my blessing to unblock with immediate effect.

I'm afraid I don't really have that much more of substance to add, because (and not to broken-record it), I am none too familiar with JPL's body of work on the project (again, to the best of my recollection, we've never spoken prior to this incident). Nor, I'm afraid, do I have the time to review a mountain of evidence. But I don't think any of that is really needed atm, anyway.

Thanks again, Herostratus, for reaching out, and thanks to the many of you who contributed positively and with compassion throughout this and continue to do so. And good luck and best wishes, JPL.

Yours, El_C

(Posted on request by BilCat (talk) 05:26, 4 September 2021 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks El C, that's fine. I myself can't unblock anybody tho, rhat's up to the admin corps. Herostratus (talk) 06:24, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ping @Awilley and Amakuru: per request. Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:18, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, Herostratus, though I already knew that — that last bit was directed at Amakuru as an uninvolved admin. Sorry if I got impatient, but after I saw that you didn't reply to my email for +12 hours, and at the same time having seen BilCat's unrelated email, I piggy-backed. Not that I'm complaining, obviously, since it took me almost 2 days to get to your original mail. Still, at the time, it did look like expediency was called for, but perhaps I misread and it isn't so much...? Doesn't matter.

In any case, I don't know if I'll be around for the discussion about a conditional unblock (be it on JPL's talk page or ANI, or both), but if not, please feel free to reference this exchange if you (or anyone) finds it pertinent to anything. Basically, as the blocking admin, I'm good with going with the flow, and if that flow leans to the side of leniency, all the better. Thanks again. El_C 21:34, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refactor your accusation of bad faith in [1]. It violates WP:NPA, WP:AGF and WP:ASPERSIONS. TIA, _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:59, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think a better approach would be for you to withdraw the nomination instead? Anyway, good faith can be lost. We're trying to do work here. We have to be precise about what kind of environment we're working in. Nothing personal I assure you. It's just business. Herostratus (talk) 03:30, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll ask you again to strike that comment per the policies cited; otherwise I believe it should be reviewed by the community. But does either of us want this? Surely you have better things to do, as do I (and ditto for people who'll be reviewing it). Please strike this sentence and we can move on. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:02, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I'll refactor. Herostratus (talk) 04:17, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's appreciated, although the word trolling, even trolling (fishing), is not particularly friendly. Let's avoid bait (fishing) and such, shall we? So pretty please, just remove the trolling reference too, preferably without trying to come up with another "cute" synonym. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:34, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sheesh, OK, OK, fine. Herostratus (talk) 06:19, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO, the statement was clearly out of line and totally off the subject. Even redacted, it reflects badly on its author in a formal process. In keeping with assuming good faith, an ungrudging apology is the very least we might expect from a contributor of long tenure who has admitted such a poor choice. BusterD (talk) 19:21, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's never off subject to defend the Wikipedia. But, yes, it was a poor choice, and I wish I hadn't done it. I'm a bit mad at myself for letting my emotions grab me and the consequent intemperate language, without good sources to back it up. OK? I didn't apologize because I redacted under threat. And fine, that is appropriate often enough. No apology is needed I think because the person's request was acceded to, and I think that ought to be sufficient?

Don't feel alone. I find sometimes my stridency gets in the way of my better judgement. To use your terminology, when I'm walking the fine line between straightforwardness and politeness, sometimes I end up over the line on both counts. You've expressed contrition, and we've no need for absolution here. I will assume you'll go back to fine work you do, and you'll take this as the tiny lesson it became. Dude! Go out and shake the rafters of heaven. Piotrus is an adult; they value your frankness and directness as much as I. BusterD (talk) 18:35, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah how about that! Thanks! Herostratus (talk) 06:43, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No I won't take it to talk - I clearly said that "multiple" opens up uncertainty about "does it mean two or more, or what?" - and by reverting you express disagreement. I won't take it to talk... because I don't have any more arguments. I won't waste my time trying to express my argument eleventy different ways. Either you see my point or you don't. And you clearly showed that you don't, or you wouldn't have reverted me. CapnZapp (talk) 17:44, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I hear you. I imagine it must be difficult to work with people who are stupider than you, so my sympathies. Herostratus (talk) 01:12, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Napoleon's last day of battle may be in one article in Wikipedia, but other sources look at the four days of encounter between Napoleon and Wellington's army in Belgium. So I find that change here nitpicking. None of those days was in the little village of Waterloo, which was where Wellington slept, not where they fought. If you look at another Wikipedia article, you will see it called the Waterloo Campaign, at Hundred Days#Waterloo Campaign, which describes each day from June 15 to June 18, 1815. I can change the text in Blue at the Mizzen to the "last day of the Waterloo campaign", using your reasoning and source, right? --Prairieplant (talk) 07:53, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right I know about Ligney and Quatre Bras and all. Sure you can if you want to, I don't mind. Herostratus (talk) 07:59, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I remember your reasoning for the removal of players at Talk:100 Greatest NHL Players. Does NBA 75th Anniversary Team (along with NBA 25th Anniversary Team, NBA 35th Anniversary Team, 50 Greatest Players in NBA History) fall into the same category? – Sabbatino (talk) 05:42, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure, @Sabbatino:. This list is the outcome of a vote rather than the intellectual product of some people sitting around a table, as the NHL list was IIRC. My personal opinion is that that doesn't make enough of a difference, because putting together the voting mechanism is work, and the list has or could have material value. But you could make that case that it does. I really hate deleting these lists on somewhat technical grounds, but I would feel compelled to, so I'm not going to interfere either way. Wikipedia:Copyright problems has a place to ask. there's also an essay that provided guidance, Wikipedia:Copyright in lists. Herostratus (talk) 06:24, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. (t · c) buidhe 01:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (New Zealand) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt you will get a reply at Teahouse from Depisteme, who has already removed the same ramble from own Talk page. I, myself, was intrigued by the User name's closeness to Episteme, but not so much the time sink the posting and subsequent exchanges it triggered at Teahouse. David notMD (talk) 11:47, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To be sure. I mean either he's from Mars or is trolling. Either way he needs to go, and the ((( ))) thing is anti-semetic and that alone is grounds. Herostratus (talk) 13:59, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First, I wanted to thank you for your thanks. I'm pretty new and haven't yet talked to anyone, so I appreciate the "human touch".
I've read some of your user page: you are a hoot! I'm pleased to see your thoughts about Her Maj mirror my own: a Down Under republic can't come soon enough, IMHO.
Also, I'm hoping you may be able to help me. My perusal of History was hampered by two impenetrable final paragraphs. It looks like a job for someone with a background in Russian translation. Are you that someone? (I realise this request should probably go on the talk page for the article but I thought this was worth a shot while I was here). EditrixOz (talk) 15:17, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi back @EditrixOz:. Dang, that is dog's breakfast of text isn't it. If it was just awkwardly written that could be fixed, but some of it can't make head nor tail. I don't know the source, because the Russian Wikipedia only has a stub on the town. So hmmn I don't know what to do exactly. Herostratus (talk) 02:28, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad to hear you, too, found it bamboozling. Thanks for giving it a look. EditrixOz (talk) 08:26, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Well, there's a template for everything here @EditrixOz:, so I slapped a {{Copy edit section}} on the last paragraphs. This kicks the can down the road, and let George do it, I guess. I mean I don't like to do that, but I'm just not up to handling it right now, and maybe somebody will come alone who is, eventually. (Putting in that template puts the article in a category of articles needing copyedit, and there is a Copyeditor's Guild that watches that and tries to get them eventually.) Herostratus (talk) 23:57, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article The Dellwoods has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Sources are Discogs (which is user submitted) and personal blogs (which are unreliable). No better sourcing found in music publications nor publications giving the history of MAD.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 23:19, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 23:27, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:WCMX athletes has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 23:55, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The earliest edits from this user were constructive, yes. The warnings, however, are from a spree of edits they did today spamming advertising links across articles. The "dwelling" references, one of which you reverted, were being mass-added to articles with "dwelling" in the text (and the ref was simply a link to the website of a real estate agency). jp×g 03:53, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Non-admin closure on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:30, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am concerned your contribution and edit summary at [2] reads like personal attack(s) and suggest you consider taking immediate steps to review it. In general I believe you have brought forward some useful points at that discussion, though I don't agree with all of them, but firmly believe the contribution I have just mentioned is inappropriate. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:30, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Djm-leighpark:. kSorry, it was a joke. I was characterizing my own edit and I think we're allowed to jocularly criticize ourselves... I was going on and on -- with reason I think, but still. I would never so characterize another editor's edit. I joke to much, and it's either a character flaw and/or a manifestion of my mania. I usually try keep a decent lid on it, with I hope some success. Mush from the wimp is an article here, a famous headline in my home town. I've used it occasionally before with no objection.

But now see I upset another editor, and made you and me spend time worrying about it, and that sucks, and so I'm sorry for that, but I can't undo edit summaries, and also thank you for your diligence of enforcing civility. Herostratus (talk) 23:18, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I now spot their is a wikilink in the edit summary I didn't follow. I am colour defective and sometimes (depending on the monitor) I miss wikilinks (especially my own unintended red-links). Still a little concerned about some of the criticisms but I'll leave it at that. Thankyou for replying. Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:33, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at WP:ANI regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Bludgeoning at Hogan AfD and DRV. The discussion is about the topic Stephen Hogan. Thank you. Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:28, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Herostratus (talk) 13:05, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Herostratus. I want your help. It's been 5 months now trying to upload a new picture in a page but it failed, and I want to create a page about something. I will appreciate your response and your help. I thank you. Kenzie Abraham (talk) 18:09, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Kenzie Abraham. I'll be glad to look at it as I may, but I'm super busy right now. Herostratus (talk) 20:00, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then , no problem. Kenzie Abraham (talk) 06:43, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK User:Kenzie Abraham I'm here. I'm glad to help. What trouble are you having? Why can't you upload the picture? If you like you can email it to me and I can do it. Also, as for creating a new page, have you looked at Wikipedia:Articles for creation? Herostratus (talk) 07:02, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Idea page -Emotional Response of New users

• Apologies for my very terse dense Idea -Anyone with your username is clever :-) I think in tables and tersely
• I forgot to change gears
• I have changed the name on Ideas and reformulated it. If there are issues please advise

---

Your thoughts would also be appreciated on how to make user page and talk safe The details are

1. User to control access on any/all of user/user talk/sandbox for view/edit/search/category access. They can specify to include/exclude specified users, or a class of users(IP, any with admin action in the last 6 months).
2. If an Admin is specified, the Admin can choose to over-ride but get a warning
3. User is responsible for their page is monitored by bot. If they ignore, the Bot sends message and autoreverts to the last safe version

• User can still be contacted

1. By another user using squiggly brackets, by subscriptions etc <BUT that means the messenger's comments are visible to their peers and bystander
2. Neutral responses are available for talk, alarms, and message. User can also add their own
3. There seems to be different views
4. Let's wait a few day
5. I am going to concentrate on another article for awhile

Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 03:29, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Wakelamp:. Geez I don't know. You can always just delete any message on your talk page, and if becomes a problem get admin help. Unfriendly edits of your user page are very rare and are vandalism and can be easily rolled back. (It would be OK to allow only yourself and admins to edit your user page and other non-talk pages, with a request for a software change, but this is solving a problem that barely exists and would be unlikely to be approved. And of course we sometimes want other uses to be able to edit our sandbox etc without jumping thru hoops.) You can also just not read your talk page.

I don't know what squiggly brackets do. But your right to control your userspace is overridden by the right (and need) of other editors to quickly contact you, I would say. Also for my part I welcome people yelling at me on my talk page if they're right (which is sometimes), that is how I learn and grow.

I think that you can request full protection for your talk page now, which means nobody can edit it (except admins). You would surely be turned down tho. Willingness to communicate with colleagues to at least some degree is usually a requirement for editing. It's the editing floor or a large and fast-moving publication, people are going to yell sometimes. (If you have had an experience with someone being unnecessarily unkind, that sucks and I'm sorry.)

Also, shouldn't this be at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)? I personally can't do anything about it. If you're sending this message out to a lot of people, again, Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) would be better. Herostratus (talk) 03:52, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I just sent the message to you. You are the only one that reacted about the the emotions. I feel like I am talking a different language, and just wanted to know what I can do

Unfriendly edits of talk pages I think are more common than you think. (Just by trawling around user and reading social media); experienced editors may have thicker skin and are likely to have assertiveness skill. But with UI interactions, negative messages/trolling can cause people to leave. Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 23:39, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I will move this over to ideas. Thank you for your time and have a great weekend! (I live in Melbourne Australia and the weather is beautiful after torrential rain yesterday!)

with thanks PaulWakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 21:42, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK User:Wakelamp, and good luck. Make sure to be as clear as possible on what you are suggesting. The weather here in American has been unseasonably warm, I was outside in short sleeves today. Herostratus (talk) 22:07, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Did you mean to remove my comments at VPI? — xaosflux ^Talk 00:58, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Xaosflux, no! I would never do that. There was an edit conflict and I messed up. Sorry. I'll restore then right off if you haven't already! Trout slap for me. Herostratus (talk) 01:28, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Nicki Minaj on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:31, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nicki Minaj? No thanks lol. Herostratus (talk) 03:46, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Orlandus_Wilson#proposed_deletion. --Kku (talk) 10:24, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This would be my first time through. The first movie remains the only film I've paid to see twice consecutively. Book is an old favorite. BusterD (talk) 21:58, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I only saw the first one -- not bad. Usually sequels to these things tend downword so I didn't watch the others, also the first movie ended about where the book did, so the rest is some non-Heinlein people writing. I like Heinlein, have read about six of his books, *Stranger in a Strange Land* is his masterpiece I think. Herostratus (talk) 17:13, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Off topic: "mnmh"? BusterD (talk) 22:31, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, well "mnmh" is that sort of sound you make (or I do anyway) when considering something. It's sort of like "hmmm" and sort of like "mmmm" and sort of like "mmnn" and sort of like "hnnnn" but not exactly like any of these. It's "mnmh". There's definitely a tonal component too. A rising tone pushed toward the palate might mean one thing, a dropping tone going almost slightly gutteral might mean something else, a sudden sharp rise at the end something else, a low growl appended something else. In text, it's noncommital and vague, since English doesn't have orthography for tones. In edit summaries, it just means "Talk page edit summaries don't matter, but I want to keep my edit-summary percentage up, so I have to put something, and sometimes I get tired of "my 2c". Herostratus (talk) 00:55, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

still new here but just wondering why it wouldn't be relevant to mention Victoria Sellers' support for Donald Trump. your reason for undoing was "She's not in politics. So it doesn't belong." but most people aren't "in" politics but their political views are still mentioned on wiki. don't really understand, would appreciate if you could explain the unspoken rule about it to me, ty. she is very vocal about her love for Donald and used to do at least 5 Instagram stories per day about him & was very active as a supporter. would luv to know about why a person's politics should not be mentioned for my future reference, ty ty — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterSelIers (talk • contribs) 00:42, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:PeterSelIers, and welcome to the Wikipedia! So, as far as living persons are, the controlling rule is WP:Biographies of Living Persons, the gist of which, is to respect the privacy of persons as much as possible without compromising our core mission. Victoria a pretty obscure person. I doubt she should even have a article. Since we do, it should mainly be about her public career. For most people, the personal information is limited to basic stuff -- where they were born, went to school, names of spouse(s), number of children, like that. Beyond that, we want to see more material on the TV shows she was in, books she wrote, whatever. There's just no need to get into her personal stuff, how many dogs she has, how much her house cost, how her living room is furnished, who her favorite actors or ballplayers or politicians are, and so on. If she was really famous it might be different. For her, it's a little too gossipy for my taste, and WP:BLP directs us to be as conservative as possible. Herostratus (talk) 01:08, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I keep thinking that we are about to see the block not done, and then someone else comes along and expresses support for it. Now people are using words like "abuser" to describe me and I guess my actions in this case. Why is it that there is no expectation of civil dialogue, assuming good faith, and treating other editors as human beings in this process?John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:10, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• It does appear that some people would block an editor for removing an extra space from what was deemed the wrong article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:29, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I guess. But I mean after all you were given special consideration. I guess every time you want to work on an article in any way shape or form, you should first check to make sure that it has no connection to religion in any way shape or form, I guess. You could possibly pick an area that doesn't include biographies and isn't likely to contain any anything about religion -- Category:Forts in Canada by province or territory, for instance; chosen at random, but there are probably scores of thousands of similar areas. Herostratus (talk) 01:38, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Hi, Herostratus. I'm not sure that WP:XRV close was accurate. Rollback -- bundled or unbundled -- is explicitly an XRV-reviewable action, mentioned explicitly in WP:XRVPURPOSE, which was why Jclemens and I proposed it be reviewed at that forum rather than ANI. You also don't seem to have followed the DRV conversation it was spun off from, which was explicitly discussing whether the article should be sent to AfD or not; it was imo forming a consensus in that direction, but it'd been open for all of a day. Vaticidalprophet 09:53, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, maybe I messed up, but I guess I still think it was the best thing to do. There are a lot people and actions involved here and I don't think at all that's its simply a matter or "hey an admin maybe misused her tools, here". Anything that any regular editor can do and another regular editor can easily undo is a user dispute. (Not every editor can roll back, but anyone who wants can ask for that bit). It's clutter to put it at this new, important, specialized board which is still in the process of being defined via practice. I feel strongly enough about that I thought it best to make a clean break.

I did follow the DRV thread. I never heard of a discussion having to undertaken and a consensus reached before sending an article to AfD before, so I did. I'll make a note of that there.

User:Cunard is just trying to get justice and went to two wrong venues -- DRV and XRV -- when they should have gone to either ANI or the edit warring board. Rather than letting this dog's breakfast develop we should have cleanly and clearly told them that they made a mistake and fixed it for them. Herostratus (talk) 10:18, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to precisely define the scope of a new board is an important, even laudable thing for the exact reasons you note. That would be why XRV has been explicitly defined from the very outset as including non-admin-specific permissions such as rollback (see specific use of an advanced permission, including the admin tools and explicit reference to permissions granted at WP:PERM at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2021 review/Proposals, repeated at WT:XRV, plus repeated reference at WT:XRV to permissions all over the adminship scale) -- specifically to avoid misunderstandings like the one you just made. (Substantial modern-era precedent also exists for the reviewing of rollback specifically for admins specifically, e.g. the GiantSnowman arbcom case.) Vaticidalprophet 11:06, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's hard for everyone to keep up with everything here. So, I'm not super up on that, but let's say I have template editor permission, and I use it vto andalize, it would go to WP:ANI. But if an admin uses her template editor permission (comes with being an admin) to vandalize, she would go to a different place, WP:XRV, cos she's a admin. Right so far?

So... if act I generally bad -- cursing, misspelling every third word, making biased RfC closes, edit warring, blanking articles, what have you -- and I won't stand down, I go to to WP:ANI. But if an admin did any of these things, she would go to WP:XRV, cos she's an admin. Right? Or if not, then where is the cutoff? Is there, specifically, a list of what non-admin actions do or do not go to XRV rather than ANI?

If there is -- I haven't looked -- and it's supported by general consensus, well, consensus can change. The board is live now, so new eyes are going to see it and new voices are going to be heard about how to use it. Interesting question, and I brought it up there. Herostratus (talk) 11:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, misuse of template editor perms is covered by XRV, which is explicitly stated in the giant bold text right there in WP:XRVPURPOSE. Pretty easy to spot. First thing my eye was drawn to the first time I looked at it, even. Misuse of 'tools' broadly construed is an XRV issue. I'm a non-admin, but I'm a page mover, so I can make blacklisted titles and perform moves most editors can't; if I decided to move a high-profile page to H A G G E R on WHEELZ!!! and delete the redirect then I'd be taken to XRV just as fast as if an admin did. As one can see in the giant bold text in XRVPURPOSE, rollback is an explicitly covered tool, so rollback misuse (by admins or non-admins) is correctly reviewed at XRV. Vaticidalprophet 11:27, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have undone your close at XRV. I understand the intent but they were clearly not in the wrong venue and deserve to be heard. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:08, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Everybody deserves to be heard, but everybody doesn't deserve to be heard everywhere. That is why people have walls and rooms in their homes. And actually you're not supposed to do that, that's why it says "don't edit this". This is gosh-darn mess, I'm not sure your action helped, and the effect is going to be "See, this new board is mess, people are taking editing disputes and edit wars and personal anger here, it's not a good board". I guess this whole thing is going to end up at WP:ANI. Oh well. Herostratus (talk) 10:18, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello How are you can you help us to review this article and put your and thank you Wikipeida From Saudi Arabia (talk) 03:57, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

― Tartan357 ^Talk 13:25, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Peng Shuai on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Sports notability on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:30, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:31, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You rather got the worst of it, and while you didn't handle everything perfectly, RfA seems to be a place where the perfect is very much the enemy of the good. Kudos for braving the storm. — Charles Stewart (talk) 20:20, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Will Smith on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reminding us that poetry is just as important as science. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 02:27, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Caleres company logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:09, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Draft talk:David Firth (animator) on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for actually considering the merits. I do not think ambassador articles are really good for proposed deletion. While ambassadors are not default notable, many do get enough coverage for their role as such to be notable. It is tricky though, because a certain percentage of ambassadors are notable for unrelated things.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:33, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 18:51, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

After someone replies, like I did, please don't change the meaning of your comment (like you did)[3]. In this case, I don't care. But if you do it again, just add a new comment in the thread explaining what needs to be corrected. Thanks. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:53, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I respect your opinion, but I cannot agree that this was anything worth worrying about in the least or would improve the readability or comprehensibility of the thread. If it was part of a pattern, maybe. Herostratus (talk) 19:59, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since I agreed with you that it wasn't a problem, we're not in dispute. On the other hand, I made contact about it in interests of preventing any potential pattern with more problematic changes down the road. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:14, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Herostratus (talk) 00:42, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

'preciate the discussion thanks NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 00:51, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just notifying you of this ANI thread connected to a discussion on the MoS talkpage. Boynamedsue (talk) 17:13, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Paul Pelosi on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | July 2022 Backlog Drive
On 1 July, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 20:25, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

QueenofBithynia (talk) 07:26, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Elizabeth II on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Atacama humanoid, skull profile.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the subject of the RSN thread. Metaphor begins:

"I can assume things don't normally fall from the sky.

I can presume, since it's early Sunday morning, nobody's going to try to harm me.

Oh my god, the Japanese are bombing Pearl Harbor! This is no drill!"

Metaphor ends. I wonder if I could do this in haiku... BusterD (talk) 19:11, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, congrats for your talk page appearing in the category Category:Forts in Canada by province or territory. Very cool but you're looking a bit defensive. BusterD (talk) 19:18, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:24, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:30, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kevin M. Kruse on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:10, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:ICAR canned beef monument.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Christine Weston Chandler on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:In the news on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:30, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day! Hi Herostratus! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 06:16, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Herostratus. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! BananaBreadPie12 (talk) 15:39, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

BananaBreadPie12 (talk) 15:39, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply] 

New Page Patrol | October 2022 backlog drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 21:16, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Newimpartial (talk) 21:37, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Herostratus, oversighted revisions are (by default) displayed struck through with two lines in revision histories, while plain revision deletion results in a single line. There was no oversighting. Additionally, the revision deletion has been undone, and the deleted comment had been visibly quoted in the opening statement all the time. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:48, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thank you! Herostratus (talk) 00:58, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]