User talk:Tiny Particle

Hi Tiny Particle! 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 ChamithN (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:01, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mario Zippermayr, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cover story. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:06, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, 1910–11 Aston Villa F.C. season, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Boleyn (talk) 21:32, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi mate, I hope you're actually planning on expanding the articles you created at 1923–24 Aston Villa F.C. season and 1956–57 Aston Villa F.C. season. As things stand, those articles don't really add anything beyond the content we already have at 1924 FA Cup Final and 1957 FA Cup Final, so they're not really much use. Feel free to add the club's league record from those seasons in order to make them worthwhile. – PeeJay 16:46, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at my edits you will see that I have been expanding several other AVFC season articles. The above two have {{construction}} Why would you think I was not planning on expanding the above? Tiny Particle (talk)

Please also stop adding the {{Aston Villa F.C. matches}} template to season articles. That template does not (and should not) contain any links to Aston Villa season articles, and thus should not be used on such articles. – PeeJay 17:34, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ffs. Show me one were the addition was not an obvious error Tiny Particle (talk) 17:44, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No need to get so defensive. I'm sorry if my tone came across as aggressive, rather than as matter-of-fact as intended. I've been on Wikipedia for a very long time, and I've seen people use the {{under construction}} template without ever actually coming back to their work. I don't see any examples that were obvious errors, all I saw was someone copying content from one article to another. You would have been better off drafting your articles in a sandbox before publishing them, and perhaps even writing some of your own content rather than just copying. I appreciate you added the attribution directions to your edit summary, but the tone of 1957 FA Cup Final is (by definition) different to the content that should exist at 1956–57 Aston Villa F.C. season. Hope that helps. – PeeJay 18:12, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PeeJay:, Yeah sorry for being so tetchy, especially as you did not 'sabotage'/apply the letter of Wiki policy without thought to spirit as per message headings above and below this. I would dearly love to set up a barebones page for each season for every football league club season especially Aston Villa (All Villa fans are historians}. This would allow us to copy snippets details from say a players Wiki article to the particular season it refers to thus building a comphrehensive article by using the linking power of wikipedia to make the continually incremental improvements to encyclopedia we are building. This is not efficient with articles in draftspace as it fucks up the smooth transition between relevant articles and prelinking to non existing articles in the mainspace are always reversed. This is so easy with the mediawiki software and so impossible with the Byzantine rules that have developed. Is there anyway I could get a dispensation for this project? Tiny Particle (talk) 14:51, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the desire to build up a comprehensive history of your favourite team; I myself did so (with help) for Manchester United over the course of a few months. But please don't cut corners. Content written for one article may not have the same context if you just copy and paste it to a different article. Also, there's no need to pre-link articles, but if the topic is notable, links should be left in place per WP:REDLINK. You can link to that next time someone reverts you for linking to notable topics. – PeeJay 16:17, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating 1956–57 Aston Villa F.C. season. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Reading Beans (talk) 05:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, [[Draft:]]1923–24 Aston Villa F.C. season, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:35, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tiny Particle. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that [[Draft:]]1923–24 Aston Villa F.C. season, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:02, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tiny Particle. Thank you for your work on 1923–24 Aston Villa F.C. season. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, I had the following comments:

Hey y'all! I sure hope y'all are havin' a mighty fine day today. I just wanted to say a heartfelt thank you for takin' the time to contribute to Wikipedia by creatin' that there article. I'm happy to inform you that your article has adhered to Wikipedia's policies, so I've marked it as reviewed. Now y'all can rest easy and enjoy the rest of your day, along with your kinfolk! Y'all take care now, ya hear?

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 16:19, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from 1924 FA Cup final into 1923–24 Aston Villa F.C. season. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 19:42, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce links in actual articles to draft articles, as you did to 1957–58 Aston Villa F.C. season. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been removed. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 09:36, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

1919–20 Aston Villa F.C. season

added a link pointing to George Ramsay

1922–23 Aston Villa F.C. season

added a link pointing to George Ramsay

1923–24 Aston Villa F.C. season

added a link pointing to George Ramsay

1924–25 Aston Villa F.C. season

added a link pointing to George Ramsay

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Aston Villa Academy Graduates has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. GiantSnowman 14:58, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Herbert Chapman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Harry Chapman.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:53, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you sending me my first thanks on Wikipedia :) Juvanet (talk) 04:42, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tiny Particle. Thank you for your work on Charles Barde. SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hello my friend! Good day to you. Thanks for creating the article, I have marked it as reviewed. Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 05:40, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do not surprise change the titles of tons of Wikipedia articles in short succession. We have a process for that, WP:RM, if you'd like to propose a move - although as a heads-up, I think your proposed forms have basically 0% chance of being agreed with. If you do move, you need a more substantial reason than "English language" - that would be a cause to move Al-Baqara to The Cow or the like, but not to change the disambiguator. SnowFire (talk) 18:27, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted your moves. If you still think they're worthwhile, follow the instructions at the top of Wikipedia:Requested moves to propose them and there'll be a community discussion. Per above, though, Wikipedia doesn't really do parentheses as alternate titles in other languages very often, nor does it use it as a numbering, hence my skepticism of the community agreeing. SnowFire (talk) 18:34, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing—Attacks on the MV Maersk Hangzhou—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 14:36, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to move a big section in an article, please try to do that by moving it within one edit. Deleting and recreating it like this screws up the version history and makes it more difficult to track changes. Thanks. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:32, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noted for future. -Tiny Particle (talk) 20:44, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited The Archers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jack Woolley.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to 1966 in Cuba. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. JTtheOG (talk) 20:12, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Al-Qahhar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vanquisher.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:04, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you created some unusual redirects (monkey masturbating, suicide hostess, etc.) to use as link targets on this article. Generally, if you want to link to another article, but you want the link text to be different from the article title, the right answer is to use a piped link. That way, you don't create an unnecessary extra page that someone could later mess up. Redirects should be reserved for reasonably common alternate or erroneous names for the target or an aspect of it; see WP:R#DELETE #8. The phrase "suicide hostess", for example, is probably unique to the Vonnegut story. —swpb^{T • beyond • mutual} 18:56, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Carrie Nation

added a link pointing to Kelly Affair

Monkey

added a link pointing to Monkey House

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maersk Hangzhou has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you.

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Black nationalism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Black activism.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tiny Particle. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:1966 in Cuba, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:06, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Shaw (name), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gary Shaw.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 20:57, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Draft:West of the Arabian Peninsula, 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 test edits you may 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. Rusty 🐈 20:38, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tiny Particle. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Carel Joseph van Kempen, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 10:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:50, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Correlated color temperature, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page KK.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:56, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Marshall Rosenberg, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Putting the information in the lead is WP:UNDUE. Please read & heed MOS:LEAD, MOS:REFPUNCT, & MOS:REFSPACE. Peaceray (talk) 17:26, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, User:Tiny Particle, thanks for working on PinkNews. I'd like to follow up on the notice you received above, since in this edit [1] you made some mistakes that relate to the MOS pages that User:Peaceray linked to you. Aside from the formatting issues that I fixed in this edit [2], I noticed that you moved information from the body of the article to the lead. Apart from basic facts, significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article. In other words, the body of the article should fully treat the subject (with citations), and the lead should summarize the body (with few or no citations). It could be argued that the article did not fully live up to these standards even before your edits, but perhaps you can reorganize the article to follow these principles. Or someone else can, when time permits. Best wishes, Perception312 (talk) 22:59, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BlueboyLINY. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Benjamin Cohen (journalist), but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! BlueboyLINY (talk) 19:05, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notice regarding PinkNews and Stonewall etc.

You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Sweet6970 (talk) 16:28, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved content from Stewart Parker into I'm a Dreamer Montreal. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content (here or elsewhere), Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 23:08, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Rachel Dixon (formerly Wright, née Jordache) 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/2025 March 8 § Rachel Dixon (formerly Wright, née Jordache) until a consensus is reached. it's lio! | talk | work 11:09, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Tiffany Eglin. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:52, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect or redirects you have created 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/2025 March 29 § Tiny Particle redirects until a consensus is reached. Plant🌱man (talk) 05:56, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved content from Sunny Side Up (1929 film) into I'm a Dreamer Montreal. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content (here or elsewhere), Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Moriwen (talk) 00:11, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Australian mushroom requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

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.
– MrAussieGuy (Talk) 23:44, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dutch Protocol, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dutch Protocol until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm AnonymousScholar49. I noticed that you recently removed content from Annelou de Vries without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 17:31, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tiny Particle, please slow down. Your recent GENSEX editing has been an issue and I'd prefer you hold your horses so this doesn't become worse of an issue:

Just regarding the Dutch Protocol:

• You translated the Dutch Protocol article from the Dutch wiki.[3] This isn't in itself a problem and is quite laudable, but as later pointed out to you the Dutch article was written by a PROFRINGE sock[4]

• I remove poor sourcing from the article[5]
• You reinstate asking me to remove them individually[6], which I do
  • Particularly, I remove the A Wider Lens podcast[7], a self-published podcast by a pro-conversion therapy group which is as far from a reliable source as it gets
• Then I find that you added the source to a BLP[8] (not as a parcel of edits, but an explicit edit to add that source),
• Then created a redirect of the podcast to it's creator so you're obviously aware of it[9]
• Then add the source to another BLP[10]

Regarding other edits:

• You remove that historically the medical system insitutionalized transphobia. This is a common terminology, see for example Institutional racism. You removed it with the comment institutionalized transphobia: ?? should this be institutionalized transgenders?[11] For the records, "transgenders" is not a neutral way to describe trans people

Regarding your redirects:

• You pointed transgender children from transgender youth to gender dysphoria in children.[12] These are not the same topic and this redirect makes no sense
• You created a redirect from Transgender and gender diverse to Standards of Care for the Health of Transgender and Gender Diverse People.[13] A term for a demographic should not be linking to an article on a document outlining treatment.

This was from a very quick skim of your recent editing these past two weeks. Please, slow down. Particularly, chill on those redirects. But really, please stop reinstating disputed content across multiple pages when challenged on it the first time and never, ever, cite podcasts by conversion therapy groups for anything. Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 19:11, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding You are actively trying to salt the Dutch Protocol, so the depth is needed here - If consensus is that the material you added to the Dutch Protocol article is filled with issues, you should not attempt to copy and paste it wholesale to multiple BLPS to evade the issues being dealt with. I'll note that at the AFD, I've been explicit that we should have an article on the Dutch Protocol, the current text is just a mess of OR and other issues.[14]

Your claim This is not biomedical information as defined by WP:MEDRS. Peer Reviewed Journals co-authored with others are secondary sources) is false. WP:MEDRS: A primary source is one in which the authors directly participated in the research and documented their personal experiences. They examined the patients, injected the rats, ran the experiments, or supervised those who did. Many papers published in medical journals are primary sources for facts about the research and discoveries made - A group publishing the results of a study they ran is the quintessential definition of a MEDPRIMARY source

• How this should work is you find RS that other people wrote, saying "this group did these studies and published this protocol", and cite those. You don't just cite the group's own publications about what they did because there's no evidence it's WP:DUE.
• These articles likely fail WP:GNG in their current state because of this. "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. For example, advertising, press releases, autobiographies, and the subject's website are not considered independent - I think some of these figures are notable, but as the articles stand that's not established because you mostly cite things they themselves wrote.

Please self-revert[15][16][17], your behavior at this point is getting tendentious - when facing a clear AFD for content and sourcing issues the solution is not to copy the content everywhere you can. Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 22:45, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Thomas Steensma 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/Thomas Steensma 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.

Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 16:47, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, you may be blocked from editing. Specifically, this edit summary is way below the standards expected of you in the topic area. Because, yes, the subject being co-author to your source DOES make that source a primary one. And yes, the results of medical research DO fall under the domain of WP:MEDRS. It is explicitly counted as Biomedical research at WP:YESBMI. --Licks-rocks (talk) 18:10, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is Tiny Particle. Thank you. Loki (talk) 00:16, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited LGBTQ rights in New York, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nassau County.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:06, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on HB 3293 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 15:53, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following sanction now applies to you:

You are subject to an indefinite topic ban from "transgender healthcare, broadly construed".

You have been sanctioned for the reasons provided in response to this arbitration enforcement request.

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender and sexuality#Final decision and, if applicable, the contentious topics procedure. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the appeal process. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything above is unclear to you. asilvering (talk) 13:18, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]