User talk:Distrait cognizance

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Harry ^{Let us have speaks} 13:39, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Harry the Dirty Dog — it was fully my intention. The site is notable, I was drafting the article when the tag was added. If you wish to propose deletion please do so in a manner that is not speedy delete, since it is not applicable here. Distrait cognizance (talk) 13:41, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed it may be, but you should not simply remove the tag from an article you created yourself. You discuss the matter on the article's talk page and either the nominator or the reviewing admin (or indeed any other editor), if swayed by the arguments, can remove the tag. Removing speedy deletions tags can lead to you being blocked.

It is usually a good idea to draft articles in userspace and then bring them to mainspace so the full extent of the article is immediately apparent. Harry ^{Let us have speaks} 13:44, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. Harry ^{Let us have speaks} 13:42, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Harry the Dirty Dog — Please do not add db-tags within seconds of them being created by established editors. I have created at least 10 pages, only one of which was created directly on article space. I understand it may have been preferable to draft something longer first, but I think you will find that db no longer applies and that it would be wasteful as per WP:SNOWBALL to readd the tag. Distrait cognizance (talk) 13:47, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added it "within seconds" because it had already been deleted and was immediately recreated. There was no reason to think that the original reason for deletion no longer applied.

In any event, you still need to follow the proper procedure. A note on my TP would have been sufficient, and I would have reviewed the article and removed the template. Indeed, I have been helping you to make improvements to it! Harry ^{Let us have speaks} 13:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Harry the Dirty Dog, I was not aware that speedy deletions could not be contested by the page-creator. Distrait cognizance (talk) 14:00, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They can be, but not by simply removing the speedy tag (unlike Prods). You need to state your case on the article talk page. Any notice there that the article is being actively worked on will lead admins to wait before taking any action, unless it is obviously self-promotion for example, a hoax or some other form of vandalism. As I said, a note as well on the nominator's TP may lead him or her to reconsider. Harry ^{Let us have speaks} 14:07, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Facebookcorewwwi.onion at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 09:31, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Facebookcorewwwi.onion at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 15:07, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 May 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Torist, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The Torist is a literary review that can only be reached through Tor, a dark web site? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Torist. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The Torist), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:40, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

On 25 May 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Facebookcorewwwi.onion, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Facebook released a Tor hidden service at facebookcorewwwi.onion? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Facebookcorewwwi.onion. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Facebookcorewwwi.onion), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:10, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On 7 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Autonomy Cube, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Autonomy Cube is an art project by Trevor Paglen and Jacob Appelbaum which places Tor-relays in art-museums? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Autonomy Cube. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Autonomy Cube), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Distrait cognizance. Thanks for your recent editing on Sci-Hub. You've definitely improved the article. I have just a small inquiry to make. You've added a new reference (ref name = ":4") for footnote #11, but apparently haven't defined it. I'd appreciate it if you'd have a look at it. Thanks again for all the improvements. --Akhooha (talk) 16:50, 23 August 2016 (UTC) [reply]

P.S. Since I wrote the above, Wikid77 changed the ref to ":0" (and also incidentally deleted the space I'd added). I notice that you replaced the space, and changed ":0" back to ":4", then changed it back to wikid77's ":0". The things is, as I'd pointed out to Wikid77, the content of ":0" doesn't seem to bear any relation to the statement being referred to. Thanks for your attention. --Akhooha (talk) 22:18, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Paneuropean Union, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Liberal. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:03, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For future references, please read the talk pages of articles as to ensure you're not in breach of WP:1RR — the Jill Stein article is under such discretionary sanctions, see Talk:Jill_Stein#WARNING: ACTIVE ARBITRATION REMEDIES. Your reversion re-added challenged material back into the article, despite consensus being required to add such disputed content back. You may disagree with the removal, but if it's not vandalism or BLP violating content -- you cannot add it back in without discussing it. The content has been removed again by another editor. Nevertheless, please be more diligent next time, as violating 1RR can result in one being blocked by administrators without further warning. Regards, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 02:25, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the 1337x page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Distrait cognizance. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Scihub raven.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Wcam (talk) 03:30, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Scihub screenshot.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Wcam (talk) 19:21, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tor logo has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 16:49, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Template:Point, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – Train2104 (t • c) 19:33, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Distrait cognizance. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Scihub raven.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — kashmīrī ^TALK 20:38, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Scihub raven.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:44, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Scihub raven.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Have a read of Psychological projection: pretty much the entirety of your last comment on Talk:Sci-Hub qualifies, as does your sudden cries of "harassment" after you've peppered my User Talk page with templates. WP:DNTTR.

Oh, and pay better attention: have a read of Talk:Sci-Hub#Whitelisted. Note also that JzG removed the Tor onion link, and your rantings about "censorship" are meaningless. --Calton | Talk 16:14, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm not going to leave you a template, but if you make another revert you are at 4RR and our next stop will be at WP:ANEW. This is your second warning. GMG^talk 16:24, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Sci-Hub shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
I see GMG says he won't leave you a template. I will, however. Note that you, and you alone, have already violated WP:3RR. Next stop will be a block. Bishonen | talk 16:34, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I've changed my mind, since I just noticed your 3RR warning on Calton's page, which you placed before you yourself made your fourth revert. That is too much, and of course it demonstrates that you were aware of the rule before you broke it. You have been blocked. Bishonen | talk 16:41, 27 October 2018 (UTC).[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Sci-Hub. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bishonen | talk 16:42, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Distrait cognizance. 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)[reply]

Hello, Distrait cognizance. 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)[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 COVID-19, broadly construed. 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.

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.

Alexbrn (talk) 16:54, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The Current Events Barnstar
		Awarded for efforts in expanding and verifying articles related to the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis and 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Awarded by Cdjp1 (talk) 7 March 2022 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		Awarded for being the top contributor to an article related to the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis and 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Awarded by Cdjp1 (talk) 16:02, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I left question for you Talk:COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden (diff). This was just FYI that there was a question as I don't know how well people are following pings. --Zache (talk) 07:18, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]