User talk:ToadetteEdit

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

This is ToadetteEdit's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12Auto-archiving period: 7 days

Hello Brother! I want help about one article, I adding from government official website here on wikipedia article, that is correct data but some accounts come again and again adding wrong, incorrect, misinformation and quoting wrong person with wrong name, please take action what to do? --ThinkTankResearcher (talk) 07:21, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @ThinkTankResearcher. I do not understand by the "one article"; what are you referring to? If you think that the edits are wrong, you can always revert it (using the undo functionality), but you should first understand the policies and guidelines first, and also see Help:Getting started, before reverting other's edits. Alternately, you can also raise up the concerns on the article's talk page. And the teahouse is always here to help you. Happy editing! ToadetteEdit (talk) 07:27, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

no brother article is Second Shehbaz Sharif government, I revert them 4 5 times, brother 4, 5 times already, they change it back, and currently you can check there is wrong information present, How many times I revert it back, they come back again and change it back, take action and block them, I adding data from official government website, it can't be wrong. ThinkTankResearcher (talk) 07:47, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored the article to the version of your most recent undo. From looking at the history of the article, I see a series of edits from an IP user who is currently blocked from editing due to general disruption across multiple articles related to Pakistani politics. And I do see a few good faith edits from a user which got reverted by an IP (same?). If issues persist, you can seek help from an administrator; but preferably you should start a discussion on the article's talk page. ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:04, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

right right, excellent man you did good Thank you so much and yeah you are that IP user did temper the articles of different pakistan politicians, I am credible responsibles so i want latest correct information here. Thanks again ThinkTankResearcher (talk) 06:35, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found your talk page and saw this comment (now archived) on deciding not to enter the backlog drive for AfC. You might have your reasons for not entering, but after viewing the large amount of backlog-clearing reviews you've still done, I ask you to possibly reconsider so you can get a little credit :-). LR.127 (talk) 03:17, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LR.127, thank you for this message. Tbh, I could not join the backlog due to a topic ban from most of the Wikipedia namespace (see archive 9). I attempted to join the NPP backlog last month, but I was not allowed to do so. I currently do not have enough time to review some drafts, but I may have an opportunity to do so of time allows.

On another note, I thank all of the AfC and NPP reviewers for clearing the massive backlog at AfC (~2800 by June 1). I suspect that the backlog be zero within two days. ToadetteEdit (talk) 06:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello brother, there are two accounts or IP address continuously again and again they vandalising one page, I change it few days ago, they come and destroy and it take alot of time to undo, please how to block them permanently? --ThinkTankResearcher (talk) 19:29, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ThinkTankResearcher, the best way before requesting administrative action is to discuss what is happening on the talk page. I have started a thread on the relevant talk page, see the last thread. If anything does not work, the last resort would be to request administrative attention. ToadetteEdit (talk) 05:30, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If it helps to make sense of some of the AfD voting. CNMall41 (talk) 20:18, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41, thanks for the followup. I am so confused as to why the socks keep reappearing every now and then, for two years straight. I think that Behappyyar (talk · contribs) appears to be suspicious. They have been creating almost 100 articles on Pakistani biographies among others, but if the checks are confirmed to be true, then they are trying to escape scrutiny. Probably not a good look at them, but I suspect that when they get autopatroll thing would escalate, and also that they might be blocked sooner than later. ToadetteEdit (talk) 05:56, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you should know that you recreated an article that was created by a blocked sockpuppet of an editor who engages in UPE. Your edit summary implied that the history was attributed, however I don't see that anywhere. I'm curious if you just copied and pasted the old article or did you start over from scratch, or? Netherzone (talk) 18:15, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. I saw that the page was deleted as G5, but the subject is notable so. I looked at Greg's talk page and saw the simplewiki entry linked from it. Since that article is what I expected to be included onto this wiki (enwiki), I decided to import, with attribution, the simple page onto the article. I did not list the article on my userpage for the reason. ToadetteEdit (talk) 18:19, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Yes I see that it was G5'd, but I don't see where the attribution was added that it was recreated by a blocked sock. The attribution doesn't seem to be in the edit summary or on the talk page. Sorry that I don't follow your logic about expectations. From my perspective it seems to be helping out a blocked and community banned UPE and their sockpuppet. But I trust that you had other reasons in mind and I'm sure you were acting in good faith, although I'm still confused about the process. And I am not that familiar with all the G5 criteria in relation to immediate recreation... Netherzone (talk) 18:34, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From looking at the initial edit, I clearly linked the simplewiki page piped with "attribution". But I then realize that the summary wasn't sufficient enough as required by wp:Copying within Wikipedia. I'll try to provide the notice on top of the talk page of the article.

In regards to the recent events, it is entirely unfounded. I read pages and click on random links, and when I find some title (maybe it was deleted) that is clearly notable, I attempt to create the page or keep it in the to do list (off-wiki by the way). I am in no relation with the sock, nor the master, and I was not told to create the article on their behalf. ToadetteEdit (talk) 18:43, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I opted in for the dummy edit solution. ToadetteEdit (talk) 18:47, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Netherzone (talk) 18:59, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since that article is what I expected to be included onto this wiki (enwiki), please don't proxy for Blocked editors @ToadetteEdit. What is your connection with Greg and why do you expect his article to be included? Star Mississippi 04:52, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't actually proxying. I have absolutely no connection with Greg at all. This article wasn't created on request, I created (copied) the page since the subject is clearly notable and deleting it due to G5 (while valid) was a bit excessive. I have no objections to draftification if people disagree with my bold recreation. ToadetteEdit (talk) 05:03, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have accepted several of his articles at AfC. You just happened to find one he immediately recreated on Simple.

Thank you for your willingness to accept draftification. I think that is the best course since the speedy was declined. Star Mississippi 12:52, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]