User talk:LR.127

This is a Wikipedia user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article.

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.

Start a new talk topic.

Copyvio tagging

Hi, when you tag something for RD1, can you make sure you've checked off all of the revisions that contain the copied text? All of them have to go, not just the very first one in which they appear. -- asilvering (talk) 03:35, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will do, sorry! Thanks for responding so quickly to the revdel, though - let me know if there's anything else I can do (in general) to make the process of RD1 easier. Cheers. LR.127 (talk) 03:47, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just one more thing: if you leave the URL of the source (or description, if it's not online) in the edit summary when you remove the content, that can be helpful for future editors. (From the admin perspective, so long as the URL is in the revdel request template and all the revisions have been tagged, you've already done all you can to make the job easier.) -- asilvering (talk) 03:52, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes

Hey, LR.127, I see you accepted this at pending changes. The edit changed this BLP's caste, which is the reason this article was placed under pending changes. Valereee (talk) 12:22, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! I swore I must have reverted the edit... thanks for catching it though :-). I'll double-check my other pending changes checks and will be more cautious in the future. Cheers. LR.127 (talk) 15:39, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't me who caught it, we had a request at WP:RFPP because pending changes protection wasn't solving a pretty important BLP vio problem at a little-watched BLP, and I wondered why the edits were still getting through. Valereee (talk) 15:47, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On Sean Ludwick vs Ludwig

A source was in fact provided 2603:7000:2103:79D0:FD9C:6459:FB77:2C26 (talk) 17:47, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm assuming you mean the request I declined at Redirects for Creation linked here. I saw that you entered your own IP as the source, and declined it as such. Sorry about that.

I recommend you resubmit the request and another reviewer can take another look shortly. Hope this helps. Cheers. LR.127 (talk) 19:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Hello LR.127, I have noticed that you often handle requests at Wikipedia: Articles for Creation/Redirects, and I just wanted to say thank you for all your hard work; please keep it up! I have a little piece of friendly advice to share. I have seen that you remove talk page messages from your user talk instead of archiving them. While you are allowed to remove comments from your own talk pages, archiving is usually the better option. It really helps everyone keep track of past messages more easily. Thanks for considering this :) – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:05, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thanks for the thanks.

I was considering archiving my messages, but I'm not exactly in favor of such complexity (and I'd rather not to have so many subpages in general). For now, I think archiving them in the page history like most other pages is fine, but I may soon switch to a real archive soon if I figure the hassle is worth it. Cheers :-). LR.127 (talk) 01:43, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are two bots that can automatically archive threads according to your preferences. If you are interested, I'd be happy to help you set up automatic archiving for your talk page. – DreamRimmer (talk) 01:48, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I genuinely appreciate the offer. I'll reconsider this in a few weeks and might ask for your assistance then :-). Cheers. LR.127 (talk) 01:52, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again User:DreamRimmer! It's been more than a few weeks - hope you're doing well. Can I ask if you're still open to setting up an archiving scheme for my user talk page?

A slight complication - even though I have manually removed sections and comments from my talk page, I'd still like now-deleted sections (manually removed and only accessible through page history) to also show up transparently in an archive subpage somewhere - I'm happy to grab those sections myself, but I'd like to preserve all the content of those now-deleted sections without pinging the users who made the comments and replies (or any other disruption that I haven't thought of). If this isn't possible, then these comments can stay in the page history. LR.127 (talk) 01:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Meta-Wös

Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing hoaxes, such as Meta-Wös, is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia—and then to correct them if possible. If you would like to make test edits, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ArcticSeeress (talk) 04:46, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additional note: the term "Meta-wös" is a pun on Metaverse. This was added as vandalism to the Wels page. Please be more careful with creating pages like this based on AFC requests in the future. Thank you. ArcticSeeress (talk) 04:48, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very sorry for this. I had been on the Wels page and noticed that Meta-Wös was the listed name but did not redirect. I will be more careful next time, and my intention was not to vandalize. Locatio (talk) 06:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries Locatio! For context, it appears an IP editor added the vandalism more than a month ago (Diff link here). I'm not going to contest the speedy deletion, as the added name did not have sources.

Thanks for notifying me ArcticSeeress. I'll keep an eye out in the future. Cheers :-). LR.127 (talk) 12:06, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! Locatio (talk) 15:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Thank you for being part of the fight against vandalism on English Wikipedia, and being one of the top five most active pending changes reviewers in the last 30 days. Your hard work is very much appreciated, please keep it up. – DreamRimmer (talk) 16:34, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake

On the WP redirect that I requested, which you approved, I put the wrong target. https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Redirects&diff=prev&oldid=1253439659

I put as the target Alan Rosen.

But, as can be seen from the examples given, the redirects should be instead to Alan Rosen (restaurant owner).

Apologies. Would it be possible to fix them? Thanks. 184.153.21.19 (talk) 06:12, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the correction; the redirects have been adjusted accordingly. Cheers :-). LR.127 (talk) 14:11, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. --184.153.21.19 (talk) 23:41, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your approval of drug name redirects

I just wanted to tell you that I think you're using the wrong category template for several redirects from alternative drug names you used (e.g. 5-Fluoro-α-ethyltryptamine). You're using {{R from alternative scientific name}}, but that only applies to biological names, not chemical ones. It seems that {{R from alternative name}} is the best to use for drug names. JJP_{Mas_ter} (she/they) 01:13, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice - will fix shortly! Cheers :-). LR.127 (talk) 12:07, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update - they've been fixed. Feel free to review and check, if you'd like. Thanks again! LR.127 (talk) 14:39, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Bccs" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Bccs has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 16 § Bccs until a consensus is reached. 65.92.246.77 (talk) 22:36, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming expiry of your patroller right

Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your permission "patroller" (New page reviewers) will expire on 00:00, 4 December 2024 (UTC). For most rights, you will need to renew at WP:PERM, unless you have been told otherwise when your right was approved. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion. Leaderbot (talk) 05:08, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brady Feigl

Hey, I now left a source for the other Brady Feigl but I also left a talk page discussion on whether or not to separate the articles or create a disambiguation. Do you mind contributing to the discussion there please :)? 2600:100C:A218:9A7B:80BC:CDB4:95BA:FA09 (talk) 01:22, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Hope you're doing well.

I've left a comment on Talk:Brady Feigl. For more efficient discussion, I recommend you create an account. Cheers :-). LR.127 (talk) 01:46, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]