User talk:Diamond Blizzard/Archive 1

Archive 1

Diamond Blizzard, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Diamond Blizzard! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like AmaryllisGardener (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:02, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia.

Hi, I'd just like to welcome you here. I know you've been editing a while using a default IP account and it's great that you've taken the time to register. I hope you have fun as you continue to contribute and enjoy the functional benefits of your account. I'm not the most experienced editor around, but am happy to help if you need a hand with anything or have any questions. Many thanks! Edaham (talk) 10:17, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Good Catch!

Sorry about that revert. You beat me to it and I accidentally ended up reverting your edit instead. Have a good one!--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 00:29, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Diamond Blizzard/Archive 1. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:55, 16 July 2018 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Your thread has been archived

Hi Diamond Blizzard! You created a thread called Is AD/BC or BCE/CE preferred on Wikipedia? at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Notability of Clade X

Regarding notability: stories about Clade X are all over the press, with articles directly about the simulation/fictional infective agent. This easily meets WP:GNG. Alas, some of them are written in a sensational style that might be taken to suggest that this is a real disease, at least until the reader has read some way into the article. -- The Anome (talk) 18:23, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Okay. Maybe notability wasn't the problem? I was just wondering whether there was some larger article in which the information would fit better. Something like a "list of disease simulations," for instance. Diamond Blizzard (talk) 18:26, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Diamond Blizzard! You created a thread called Bot edits may be appearing when they should be filtered out at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Did you ever find out what happened? Perhaps WP:VPT would be the place to ask. I didn't see the archive page for nearly two months, and I'm getting further behind.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:31, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

No, I never did. I suppose I could ask VPT, but I'm not sure how to prove what I saw. Maybe by taking a screenshot, but I'm not sure how to upload pictures to Wikipedia. This is a pretty late reply, I know, but I just noticed this now for some reason. Diamond Blizzard talk 17:28, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

@Vchimpanzee: Whoops, I didn't format the reply to template correctly last time. Trying again. Diamond Blizzard talk 17:29, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

I also took a long time to tell you, but I'm several months behind looking at the archives. I'm no expert on uploading, but Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard is one of the suggestions on the Teahouse.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:31, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

The detailed information is at Wikipedia:Uploading images.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:23, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

August 2018

Hello, I'm Donner60. I noticed that you made a change to an article, The Oscar (film), but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 03:48, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Strike mistaken message. I was trying to revert a different edit and your edit with the same purpose preceded mine. No real excuse but I have had to click 2 or 3 times on a few edits tonight. Maybe my mouse is failing but whatever it was, it was my mistake ultimately. I am glad you corrected it. Sorry for the mistake. Donner60 (talk) 03:54, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Apology accepted. This actually happened to me before when a different user accidentally reverted my edit instead of the edit I had already reverted. Diamond Blizzard (talk) 03:57, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

I may be telling you something you already know but I thought I should mention that such mistaken messages can happen when a user is using Huggle. Two good edits (vandalism reversions) are nearly simultaneous. A user thinks that he/she is reverting vandalism but actually reverts the other good edit which was placed about a second earlier. A message should come up about whether it was intended to revert the good edit; it probably always does. I am not sure why I have missed it a few times. I suppose it happens if the second user clicks on the arrow to go forward too quickly and misses the message, not realizing that a good edit has been reverted. (I am not entirely convinced that is the reason, though, because it does not happen very often. But I can't think of another reason.) I am embarrassed when I make the mistake. I also have received a couple of mistaken template messages. I think the important thing is just to get it corrected and straightened out quickly, realizing it was an unintentional mistake. You now know that you could see one of these mistaken messages again, but I thought I should give my explanation, FWIW. Good handling to realize it was likely a mistake. Donner60 (talk) 04:54, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Era style

If you have not gotten an answer to your BC/AD, BCE/CE question, you can find the answer at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Era style. Donner60 (talk) 04:59, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

I know. I've already seen the answer. Diamond Blizzard talk 01:52, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Your userpage

I've just added the {{clear}} template to your userpage, because I think that's what you were trying to achieve by adding all the linebreaks. Feel free to undo my change if not! GorillaWarfare (talk) 03:47, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

That question

You can email me the IP and I can do some scrubbing. Drmies (talk) 04:15, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

@Drmies: The problem is - I have no email registered for this account! Even more than my IP, I am worried about trolls being able to email me, especially because I often do vandalism cleanup and therefore, some of the vandals may have a reason to target me, as has happened before. Thanks for the suggestion. Diamond Blizzard talk 04:18, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

If you don't respond, they won't get your email address. Drmies (talk) 04:20, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

@Drmies: Even so, I don't want to be receiving offensive messages from them in the first place. They wouldn't be public, so it might be harder to get people to deal with them, and I don't want my email to be clogged up more than it already is with junk emails. You know, I could just state the article somewhere on Wikipedia. Most people probably won't actually be able to travel to my physical location to do anything, especially when I have not stated my real-life name and identity. And if I just state it once, many vandals aren't that dedicated as to dig up everything I have said on Wikipedia. Blocklisting for email wouldn't really work either (although I thought of it) because the trolls could create new accounts and new email addresses. Diamond Blizzard talk 04:27, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Or you can check out the five million other articles... Drmies (talk) 04:30, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

@Drmies: I had an interesting idea; I could use my home IP (which I didn't really use after I decided to create an account, except for a few times when the change was just one quick thing and I didn't want to deal with logging in) to deal with that article! I don't mind my home and school IP being tied together - it should be easy to find out they're in a similar geographic location anyway. As far as I can tell, I haven't been really targeted by anyone on the IPs either. And I'm pretty sure that it wouldn't count as illegitimate socking because: A, I am editing constructively, and B, I will not edit using both my account and IPs on the same article. Although my school IP has technically been blocked as an open proxy... I wonder whether Wikipedia ever states anywhere that it is not considered block evasion for constructive editors to switch to a different account or IP if the IP they used before was blocked for reasons that weren't their own fault. I'm pretty sure that it's generally accepted they can (or I will face a block for block evasion now) but is it explicitly written out somewhere? I've never seen it. Diamond Blizzard talk 04:39, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

This is all way too complex. If you care that much about that one article, enable your email, tell me the IP you edited from, disable your email. While targeting, stalking, etc. are nothing to make light of, it's not very likely that one edit to one article will draw that kind of attention--at least not until you started talking about it on that talk page and now here (Streisand effect). Or just let that article be. No, if you used an IP and that IP is now blocked, that doesn't make you guilty of that editors' sins. Drmies (talk) 15:06, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Your signature

I would recommend that you change your signature. This is because the color scheme doesn't conform to the criteria laid out at WP:SIGAPP. Regards — fr ⁺ 10:07, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

• Yeah that's true. On my screen here I can barely see your name. You can check these things via the tools at WP:COLOR--in your case, it's contrast that makes it less accessible to readers who don't have beautiful sharp young eyes. Drmies (talk) 15:03, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Diamond Blizzard. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Diamond Blizzard. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Upsilon Sigma Phi leaks scandal:

Under the provisions of WP:BLP I have removed some disputed content from this article, Please do not restore without explicit consensus . DGG ( talk ) 00:44, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Archive 1