User talk:98.155.8.5

Friendly GPT-3 wiki bot, at your service! Cheers. 98.155.8.5 (talk) 21:37, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That would be hysterical if you were a GPT-3. But I really don't buy it. You should consider creating an account though. Appreciate your contributions. Andre🚐 22:54, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I’ve recently reverted an edit you made to FBI search of Mar-a-Lago. I’d just like to remind you that no matter how much our personal opinions may be backed up by facts, it’s important to maintain a neutral and encyclopedic tone while editing Wikipedia. The facts can speak for themselves, without the use of adverbs. FranklinOfNull (talk) 20:23, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please bring this up on the talk page of the article. Thanks! 98.155.8.5 (talk) 20:25, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FranklinOfNull: Thanks for your update! This language has been disputed before, so hopefully the academic phrasing you used is a bit more palatable to folks who would have otherwise found it disagreeable or un-encyclopedic, heh. Previous arguments about the wording were in regards to WP:BLP issues, even though the sources supported what was said. Anyway, I think your changes are great. Thanks again. Cheers! 98.155.8.5 (talk) 21:12, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! By the way, I'm really sorry if came across as, well, snarky in my original message, that was uncalled for. FranklinOfNull (talk) 22:26, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, didn't come across that way at all. Cheers! 98.155.8.5 (talk) 22:50, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. You are welcome to edit anonymously; however, creating an account is free and has several benefits (for example, the ability to create pages, upload media and edit without one's IP address being visible to the public).

Create an account

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! VickKiang (talk) 08:26, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 98.155.8.5. You have new messages at Talk:Guy Standing (economist).
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

––FormalDude talk 08:45, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 98.155.8.5. You have new messages at 0xDeadbeef's talk page.
Message added 05:28, 4 September 2022 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

0xDeadbeef 05:28, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:50, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Mahsa Amini protests shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. —C.Fred (talk) 23:00, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The Minor Barnstar
		Just wanted to say a big thank you for the minor edits on Pekarangan. Dhio (talk?) 08:59, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Make sure to indent your replies to discussion posts properly! Indenting your posts ensures that other people can follow the conversation well. Thank you! Bowler the Carmine | talk 16:05, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up, sorry about that! Cheers. 98.155.8.5 (talk) 21:35, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for a friendly editor who is always spreading cheer. ––FormalDude (talk) 22:48, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 :)  :)  :)  98.155.8.5 (talk) 23:14, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm C.Fred. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Hector Martin (hacker) have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. See the guidelines on social media links and WP:ELMINOFFICIAL. —C.Fred (talk) 22:51, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

~~~~ NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 16:22, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do not add personal information about other contributors to Wikipedia without their explicit permission. Wikipedia operates on the principle that every contributor has the right to remain completely anonymous. Posting personal information about another user is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's harassment policy. Wikipedia's policy on this issue is strictly enforced and your edits have been reverted and/or suppressed, not least because such information can appear on web searches. Wikipedia's privacy policy is to protect the privacy of every user, including you. Persistently adding personal information about other contributors will result in being blocked from editing. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:30, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No action has been done yet but I have emailed Oversight. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:31, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Something ain't copacetic with editor AgntOtrth. Their edits and comments are not fully literate, nor do they seem sincere. I don't know what to make up it. Bull in a china shop. Classic SPA editor. Carry on. Cheers! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 07:29, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I dunno. I think I started out as a SPA editor at one point long ago, before broadening my horizons. I'm sure with time things will chill out. I've noticed a lot of combative editing behaviors on police brutality articles especially, comes with the territory I suppose, due to the contentious subject matter. Good chance to practice patience! Cheers. 98.155.8.5 (talk) 08:55, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Synchron. Thanks! Ca ^{talk to me!} 04:03, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Tutwakhamoe was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

As noted by previous reviewer, currently the biomedical claims here are supported by articles from news media instead of medical professionals, which is to be avoided under WP:MEDRS. Please make sure to include medical research from reliable and independent institutions to back up those claims.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Synchron and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Tutwakhamoe (talk) 21:34, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 98.155.8.5! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Tutwakhamoe (talk) 21:34, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Election denial movement is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Election denial movement until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. rootsmusic (talk) 16:57, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Synchron

Hello, 98.155.8.5. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Synchron".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:08, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]