User talk:911ChickenCop

Welcome!

Hello, 911ChickenCop, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Red Director (talk) 00:47, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Keep up the good work! Red Director (talk) 18:33, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle

Hi there! I've been seeing you contribute towards anti-vandalism and I must say you're doing a great job! I'm noticing that you're providing warnings manually though which is quite tiring if you ask me. May I suggest you check out Wikipedia:Cleaning_up_vandalism/Tools for a list of anti-vandalism tools to help you improve! I strongly suggest Wikipedia:Twinkle as it's most definitely one of the strongest tools in the terms of fighting vandalism. You can also checkout Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism_Unit/Academy for more one to one help if needed! Good luck fighting vandalism, and thank you for your work! TheEpTic (talk) 01:08, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yay!

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thank you for your great work, you beat me to many reverts recently! Thanks again! Puddleglum ^2.0 18:46, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Maria death toll edit undo

The edit un-done for lack of an edit summary does in fact have an edit summary. The summary states "shorten section on Senate proposal that never materialized." http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Hurricane_Maria_death_toll_controversy&oldid=930598960

For the same reason, I think the large infobox on that unpassed Senate act should be removed. It looks cool and impressive but the bill died in committee and is just a footnote to the hurricane Maria matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.149.246.232 (talk) 16:25, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Propaganda Edit

While I can understand if someone with political leanings might not like the example, it is indeed a factual example explained by an African-American Political Science Professor at very highly-reputed Universities (Vanderbilt and Princeton). This is an excellent example of political machine propaganda. Why did you delete it? Are you a Democrat? I was also raised a Democrat, but this is absolutely factual, and I think you should allow it to stand. Should we scrub from history all the bad examples we don't like? Of course not: they are all teachable moments.

My political ideology is irrelevant. I reverted your edit because it was not properly sourced. In the future, please ensure that you are citing your sources so any claims can be verified. Subtle vandalism is common on Wikipedia, and requiring a verifiable source helps combat it. 911ChickenCop (talk) 19:37, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Clint Eastwood

Thank you for getting back to me. I hope you will reinstate the edit. It didn't require any additional source material or reference because the added sentence was, in fact, based on the information already contained in the first paragraph of the Personal Life section (Relationships, marriages etc.). I simply read the material and summarized it by saying he is believed ("believed" because one of the children mentioned was an allegation and not confirmed) to have fathered as many as 8 children with 6 women. I believe the edit is helpful because the information in that section is such that one almost inevitably starts doing the math given so many different children and mothers are involved. The edit sets up what one is about to read and gives it a framework. It is a classic establishing sentence, the sort of which one would find in many pieces of reporting. I sincerely hope you will reinstate it. Perhaps you can get back to me on this. Thank you. DG

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]