Jump to content

User talk:AgntOtrth

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by WikiWikiWayne (talk | contribs) at 21:26, 20 March 2023. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome!

Hello, AgntOtrth!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips
  • Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
  • It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
  • If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
  • Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
  • When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
  • If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
  • Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Beccaynr (talk) 19:38, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Kennecott Utah Copper, 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. Materialscientist (talk) 05:21, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

how about give a person at least 5 minutes to provide a citation; here it is https://appletree.utah.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/KennecottBermDust.pdf AgntOtrth (talk) 05:24, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Kennecott Utah Copper. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Materialscientist (talk) 05:30, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I cited a State of Utah Agency. It is a two page report, and should be a quick read for you. Users are permitted to make edits. AgntOtrth (talk) 05:33, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's a good idea (read: Wikipedia policy) to cite sources right out of the gate. Articles without oversight like the kind provided by Materialscientist often decay into unverifiable garbage, leaving other volunteers holding the bag and attempting to sort things out. It's not another editor's responsibility to loiter around and wait to make sure that you've done your due dilligence in publishing an edit. Users are permitted to make edits, but only if they are verifiable. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 19:43, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What part "give a person at least 5 minutes" suggests leaving someone else "holding the bag". I was adding the citation when MaterialScientist swooped in like a hawk with giving even 60seconds to add the citation. And the second time I attempted to add the citation, without a degree of patience that same user deleted it again. By the 3rd time I finally figured out the < ref > </ ref >. All I needed was 5 minutes to input the citation. AgntOtrth (talk) 21:44, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The RefToolbar was a gamechanger for me when I was first learning to edit here - it does take some time to become familiar with how things work, and I encourage you to keep at it. Beccaynr (talk) 22:15, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can definitely attest that the visual editor is a lifesaver for new editors and a huge timesaver for a lot of editing. Source is very powerful for formatting, copy-pasting from another page, and very niche things the visual editor doesn't account for, but for new editors, it's generally far less powerful because routine tasks that are abstracted away by the visual editor (such as creating a footnote) can become tedious or something you need to memorize the formatting for. On that note, I cleaned up the formatting and removed WP:COPYVIO from the prose. This one's a little weird, because while works by the US federal government are in the public domain, the state of Utah retains control over its works. This one's kind of a weird edge case, but it's good to err on the side of caution and not copy-paste anything directly from another source to use in the prose without quotations. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 01:31, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Killing of Tyre Nichols article; warning about combative behavior

You seem to be engaging in unconstructive editing, as I have outlined here on the article talk page. Wikipedia is not the place for a battleground attitude.

I would like to kindly request that you please stop trying to make a point about your disagreements with how reliable sourcing is commonly practiced. It's one thing to take issue with Wikipedia policy, but quite another to be acting in a combative and disruptive way. Cheers! 98.155.8.5 (talk) 08:08, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been combative. You have posted more than once that I do not understand, even adding 'LOL' and stating essentially lets drop all wikipedia 'rules' about reliable sources. You attacked me. I have backed my statements with wikipedia policy/guidelines/advisements about reliability, context, opinions. AgntOtrth (talk) 20:26, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10 February 2023 Killing of Tyre Nichols

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Killing of Tyre Nichols. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Please stop repeating facts in every paragraph. {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 03:15, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So I changed your edit this morning with an explanation that it was unsourced and since it was unsourced I labeled it original research. You combatively and in an edit war, tried to justify your removing my edit. Later in the day someone else removed your edit with an explanation that beat is act, and battery is a crime - a statement/claim of which the NYT is not qualified to make. So two people disagreed with your edits. Yet you continued in disruptive behaviour by changing it back to YOUR OPINION. I then went to article and quoted from the article a statement that accurately describes the various methods used to beat Mr. Nichols. And you changed it back. So please follow your own advice and raise the issue in the talk page. And please follow your own advice and stop edited waring. And please follow WP guideline/policy of assuming good faith. Thank you. AgntOtrth (talk) 04:34, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15 February 2023 Killing of Tyre Nichols

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Killing of Tyre Nichols 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; read about 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.
Assault is the threat of battery, battery is the doing of the threat. {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 01:00, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We don't usually put refs in the lead

Hello. There was a ref to support battered but it was removed by editor WWGB in this edit because normally we don't put refs in the lead; only if they are likely to be contested edits. So, battered is supported by the facts, and by many other refs. Look down in the body to find the removed ref. Please slow your roll, and please read more WP essays, policies, MOS, and guidelines. And, use common sense. Cheers! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 23:15, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

5 March 2023

Information icon Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Killing of Tyre Nichols, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. The essay in question was an explanatory essay of an official policy. Make sure you understand what you're talking about, and Wikipedia policy in general, before doing something rash. Bowler the Carmine | talk 21:02, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you putting maintenance tags without offering even the smallest indication of what need to be corrected? What aspect of that section is "close paraphrasing? And if you believe that the section needs correcting, why haven't you fixed it, especially when you are basing your opinion on something that is not wikipedia policy? AgntOtrth (talk) 21:38, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was not the one who originally added the maintenance tag. If you wish to contest it, talk to @WikiWikiWayne. I kept it up because I have not seen changes in the wording since it was put up. As far as whether the maintenance tag is supported by policy or not, WP:COPYVIO says: Even inserting text copied with some changes can be a copyright violation if there is substantial linguistic similarity in creative language or sentence structure; this is known as close paraphrasing, which can also raise concerns about plagiarism. As soon as my laptop stops misbehaving, I will start re-paraphrasing to remove potentially copyvio content. Bowler the Carmine | talk 21:59, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You copied this message to my talk page. I do not appreciate it, and I indicated as such at the top of my talk page. Read any templates at the top of people's talk pages before posting. However, if you must notify someone of messages meant for them at your talk page for some reason, use the {{Talkback}} template. Bowler the Carmine | talk 22:04, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Received message

I received your message, but had to revert it. When posting to other's talk pages, be careful not to accidentally blank them. Bowler the Carmine | talk 20:02, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Bowler the Carmine | talk 23:55, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note that I have closed the discussion you started Talk:Killing of Tyre Nichols#Article title should be "Death of" as you should not be re-litigating a recent RM in that way.

As I said in my closure, if you feel the closer made an error in finding there is strong consensus (or otherwise in their closure), you need to follow the procedure outline at WP:CLOSECHALLENGE which involves talking to the closer first and if after talking it over you still feel it's necessary open a proper move review. It's probably better to do this if something new has changed as well but as an alternative you could open a new WP:RM if and only if something substantial has changed since the last move.

However I very strongly suggest you do not do any of this, as I think it is unlikely to achieve anything other than risking you being blocked for disruption, if you aren't already.

Note that you're free to read the previous RM and confirm that I supported "Death of" as the article title, so this has nothing to do with any personal preference for the current "Killing of" title. I admit I thought we'd at least have an official coroner's report by now so the issue might be moot. Still despite it being less clear than I'd like my preliminary view is I'd still support death of. However editing on Wikipedia means you have to accept that sometimes WP:CONSENSUS is going to be against you.

Nil Einne (talk) 10:17, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Control copyright icon Hello AgntOtrth! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Killing of Tyre Nichols, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted material from other websites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from source(s), and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate your contributions, copying content from other websites is unlawful and against Wikipedia's copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are likely to lose their editing privileges.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

It may also be necessary for the text to be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

See Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template of the permissions letter the copyright holder is expected to send.

Otherwise, you may rewrite this article from scratch. If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Killing of Tyre Nichols saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 20:17, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You COULD point to information I edited and say "Hey, let you help you not violate a policy. If you reworded it like this, it would not be a violation." You have been uncivil and bullied me in my time here on wikipedia. How about trying to help someone understand what you find to be a violation? AgntOtrth (talk) 21:22, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I already did. You are copy/pasting and close paraphrasing, like I've said. The article is a total hot mess now that puts the project in jeopardy. Sure, I'll coach you. When you want to edit, post your edit on the talk page and when it gets consensus then pull the trigger on it. Nobody is bullying you. You're blowing it. Take care always. Cheers! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 07:17, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No you did not identify anything. In fact, someone ran a report that found copyright violation UNLIKELY. And yes, you are being a bully, which is interesting since you complained of being bullied with your 48hr ban for war editing. AgntOtrth (talk) 07:22, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They don't allow us to alter the template wording; there is no opportunity in the templates to alter or add anything because we have to set them via subst:. See {{copyvio}}. Going forward, I'll reply with basics, but you already know what you're copying or close paraphrasing. We don't allow that. Please read: WP:AGF. Thanks. Take care always. Cheers! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 14:11, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No you did not identify the issue. You made blanket statement about an entire article. You blanked out section I did not edit. You are being disruptive, and you are not utilizing the article talk page to address concerns.

March 2023: article ownership

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you assume ownership of articles, as you did at Killing of Tyre Nichols. Please slow your roll. {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 07:10, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Control copyright icon Hello AgntOtrth! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Killing of Tyre Nichols, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted material from other websites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from , and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate your contributions, copying content from other websites is unlawful and against Wikipedia's copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are likely to lose their editing privileges.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

It may also be necessary for the text to be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

See Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template of the permissions letter the copyright holder is expected to send.

Otherwise, you may rewrite this article from scratch. If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Killing of Tyre Nichols saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 13:49, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, not trying to bust your butt, but half my edits are protecting the project and living people by putting out fires you start. Read on:

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

 – {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 21:26, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:AgntOtrth&oldid=1145765163"