This is an archive of past discussions with User:ToadetteEdit. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation since our last issue on 16 May. Please help translate.
Upcoming and current events and conversations Let's Talk continues
Wikimania: Register now to attend Wikimania Nairobi! Registration for the in-person event will be open until July 13 or while places remain. For joining virtually, you will be able to register at any time.
Let's Connect: The next Let's Connect Learning Clinic will focus on "1Lib1Ref: Tools, Tactics and Innovation". The session will take place on June 5 at 15:00 UTC.
Tech News: The Wikimedia Foundation will publish a hub for experiments to showcase and get user feedback on product experiments; The Moderator Tools team will launch a new filter to Recent Changes, starting at Indonesian Wikipedia. The goal is to help Recent Changes patrollers identify potentially problematic edits. More updates from Tech News week 21 and 22.
Abstract Wikipedia: A community-wide discussion for the development of Abstract Wikipedia is now open on Meta: where to store the abstract content that will be developed through functions from Wikifunctions and data from Wikidata. The discussion is open until June 12 at Abstract Wikipedia/Location of Abstract Content, and every opinion is welcomed.
Temporary accounts: Admins, bureaucrats, or stewards will be manually granting access to temporary account IP addresses to users without certain extended rights. Previously, these users were gaining this right automatically. The decision to change this was made by the Trust and Safety Product team after discussing with almost 20 large Wikipedia communities and Meta-Wiki. See the full message about the change. In addition, the team is finishing work which unblocks rollouts on large wikis. A series of deployments will be happening in June. See the latest project update to learn about the satisfaction survey, related changes to features and tools, and more.
Wikifunctions: Wikifunctions is deployed on five Wiktionaries: Hausa, Igbo, Bengali, Malayalam, and Dhivehi/Maldivian. Users of the five projects are now allowed to call on Wikifunctions' functions freely from their user interface.
WikiGames: A daily trivia game called WikiGames is coming to the Wikipedia Android app. It invites users to test their knowledge by guessing which historical event happened first based on real events from Wikipedia's "On this day" content. The game's goal is to help new audiences discover a preferred destination for discovering, engaging, and building encyclopedic content. It has been gradually rolled out as an A/B test to 50% of users in English, French, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish, Arabic, Chinese, and Turkish.
CampaignEvents extension: Two new features Invitation Lists and Collaboration List that allow organizers to promote events and WikiProjects on the wikis are now available.
WikiLearn: Discover how online learning is helping develop Wikidata skills and the new courses coming up this quarter on WikiLearn News May 2025 edition.
Youth Conference: Young Wikimedians gathered in Prague for the first-ever Youth Conference, created for young people and by young people.
Accessibility: In celebration of Global Accessibility Awareness Day 2025, we would like to look back together and highlight recent improvements and progress to ensure that the Wikimedia projects are more accessible for everyone.
Mandatory 2FA: Checkusers and oversighters will need to have two-factor authentication (2FA) enabled, otherwise they won't be able to use their tools. In the future, this requirement may apply to more user right groups. This is to increase the security of user accounts. See the full message.
For information about the Bulletin and to read previous editions, see the project page on Meta-Wiki. Let askcacwikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!
Following your request here, see forward the citations for verification. Let me know if any further citation are needed:
Infobed net worth at it's peak
In the first source the title litrerally says "on paper, infobed is already worth 1.25 billion $"
In the second source, the title explicitly says that infobed reached a worth of "more than a billion $", and in the article itself it is reported that, according to a lawsuit filed by a brokerage firm (Tel Aviv VC), InfiBond conducted a $100 million fundraising round based on a company valuation of $1.25 billion. This claimed valuation is central to the legal dispute, as the firm argues it is owed a 5% commission based on that round. Similar things in the third source.
In the fourth source, they say that Yoram Kraus is the founder of the firm. The source is mainly about the crisis the firm was facing by that time, and it dedicates a background paragraph for its worth at its peak.
Kraus' involvement in Sela Kapital (a publicly traded Israeli REIT managing income-producing real estate, with a market cap of ₪2.1 billion (May 2025)
The fifth source is a court decision in a request to affirm a derivative lawsuit against the company by a shareholder. The court specifically explains Karus' involvement in the factual background in the third section: "Factual BackgroundBackground to the Establishment of the Fund 3. The management company was established pursuant to a founders’ agreement dated December 2006, signed between Respondents 2–3 and 9, and another individual named Yoram Kraus (whose shares were purchased by the management company in August 2009 and who is therefore not relevant to this matter – see Appendix 16 to the Fund’s response). In June 2007, the management company incorporated the fund as a private company."
Sources 6–8 all address the specific matters for which they were cited. Source 7 is the official court decision appointing a trustee, while sources 6 and 8 are media reports from the Israeli press.
Sources 9-10 are israeli media articles about the product Infobed was aspiring to develop, and that's their only subject.
The 11th source is the site of Ogen (the NGO he founded with Daniella Paz and others). You are correct that the site does not specifically says Kraus is the founder, but this appears here, and also in Kraus' linkdin profile.
The 12th may not be considered "reliable" (as it's a marketing content), but as I stated before - this section is about the subject's hobbies, and I included this information because it adds texture to the article and is not of significant weight; in any case, hobbies are rarely documented by "neutral" or scholarly sources. --Amir Segev Sarusi (talk) 18:08, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
@Amir Segev Sarusi, thank you for putting forward the sources for review. If you think that the sources have significant coverage, you can include them in the article, and then you can resubmit it for review. I do not have enough time to review all of the sources now. ToadetteEdit (7M articles) 20:38, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
Hi there, did as you requested and they were unfortunately declined. Can you please leave any remark regarding the issues still on the table? I want to finish this article before proceeding to others. --Amir Segev Sarusi (talk) 14:33, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
@Amir Segev Sarusi, I have no idea why it was declined, but you should significantly address the concerns raised and resubmit. I am currently away, so I will review it at 15:30 UTC at the earliest. Meanwhile, can you explain what you did? ToadetteEdit (talk) 14:53, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
I have just taken a look of the draft and I see that it was "properly" declined due to notability concerns. From the look of the sources in question it is clear that most sources in the draft are focused more heavily towards the companies and not about the person. And so you will need to cite sources with significant depth about him so that you can prove that the subject is notable. ToadetteEdit (talk) 19:35, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
Thanks very much for reading my article on Peter J. Howard, even if rejected. It's my first for Wikipedia. My query: is there a "fatal flaw" with this living-person subject (a highly regarded university professor and author of numerous books and articles on landscape theory) if no mainstream media have interviewed him, and therefore no newspaper or other secondary-source articles can be cited? I have accurately cited the subject's books and articles, and the single, published academic source I found is included. Any suggestions you can offer (including whether I should potentially abandon this subject) are welcome! Thank you. Lonepine0204 (talk) 17:27, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
@Lonepine0204, the notability standards require at least two sources that are independent (i.e. not written by themselves), secondary (i.e. not from the affiliated institute's website) and have significant depth in the context. Or if the user meets one of the criteria of notability for academics without needing those source but it would be preferred if you add these sources into the draft. Hope that helps. ToadetteEdit (talk) 19:21, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
Thank you very much for pointing me to 'notability for academics'. I will see if that sorts out my article's dilemma! Lonepine0204 (talk) 17:42, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
Hello. You're invited to participate in The World Destubathon. We're aiming to destub a lot of articles and also improve longer stale articles. It will be held from Monday June 16 - Sunday July 13. There is $3338 going into it, with $500 the top prize and $250 worth of prizes for architectural articles. If you are interested in winning something to help you buy books for future content, or just see it as a good editathon opportunity to see a lot of articles improved for articles which interest you, sign up on the page in the participants section if interested.♦ Dr. Blofeld15:56, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
@Dr. Blofeld, year thanks for the invitation, though. However, I am technically unable to participate due to a topic ban from most of the project space, since joining would require editing a page in that namespace. I look forward to expanding a few stubs if I have time, and I will hopefully join another if there is one in the near future. And yeah, I am not interested in any monetary prizes in the meanwhile. ToadetteEdit (talk) 14:01, 6 June 2025 (UTC)
An Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in June 2025, with over 1,600 drafts awaiting review from the past two months. In addition to AfC participants, all administrators and new page patrollers can help review using the Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!
Article? You have not yet edited the two declined drafts (in one case also rejected). They are still WP:DRAFTs, and you are not attempting to promote yourself (far from your intended creation?) And if you can not find any SIGCOV article on Google or any other search engine, it is better for you to just leave those draft and edit somewhere; anything that interests you most. So you have two choices: either to pick another notable topic to write about, or continue to push these two drafts to mainspace, which might get you blocked if done disruptively. It is your choice, and I am not obligated to choose for you. ToadetteEdit (talk) 18:39, 6 June 2025 (UTC)
I am not angry, I am trying to help you but you appear to not get my idea about it. And yes, anything that interests you (I personally write about locations in Egypt, but I might also create articles on mobile phones). If you can find stuff about it, you can just add it, and ask for help resubmitting the draft. And stubs can always be expanded if more information can be found. ToadetteEdit (talk) 18:55, 6 June 2025 (UTC)
Any then you can improve existing articles related to Franklin County, Missouri, and heck, the article on the county itself has notices that say that more sources are need. You can find that sources to back up that claims in that article. This is a meaningful way to contribute to Wikipedia. Is there any other interests that come to mind? ToadetteEdit (talk) 19:08, 6 June 2025 (UTC)
You can see the thread right above this one. I attempted to join a backlog drive, then requested one to make the edits for me, but then got declined due to WP:PROXYING. So do not even think that you should add my name to it. In short, I am unable to join due to the topic ban. ToadetteEdit (talk) 19:14, 6 June 2025 (UTC)
Hello Brother! I want help about one article, I adding from government official website here on wikipedia article, that is correct data but some accounts come again and again adding wrong, incorrect, misinformation and quoting wrong person with wrong name, please take action what to do? --ThinkTankResearcher (talk) 07:21, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
Hello @ThinkTankResearcher. I do not understand by the "one article"; what are you referring to? If you think that the edits are wrong, you can always revert it (using the undo functionality), but you should first understand the policies and guidelines first, and also see Help:Getting started, before reverting other's edits. Alternately, you can also raise up the concerns on the article's talk page. And the teahouse is always here to help you. Happy editing! ToadetteEdit (talk) 07:27, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
no brother article is Second Shehbaz Sharif government, I revert them 4 5 times, brother 4, 5 times already, they change it back, and currently you can check there is wrong information present, How many times I revert it back, they come back again and change it back, take action and block them, I adding data from official government website, it can't be wrong. ThinkTankResearcher (talk) 07:47, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
I have restored the article to the version of your most recent undo. From looking at the history of the article, I see a series of edits from an IP user who is currently blocked from editing due to general disruption across multiple articles related to Pakistani politics. And I do see a few good faith edits from a user which got reverted by an IP (same?). If issues persist, you can seek help from an administrator; but preferably you should start a discussion on the article's talk page. ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:04, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
right right, excellent man you did good Thank you so much and yeah you are that IP user did temper the articles of different pakistan politicians, I am credible responsibles so i want latest correct information here. Thanks again ThinkTankResearcher (talk) 06:35, 8 June 2025 (UTC)
@LR.127, thank you for this message. Tbh, I could not join the backlog due to a topic ban from most of the Wikipedia namespace (see archive 9). I attempted to join the NPP backlog last month, but I was not allowed to do so. I currently do not have enough time to review some drafts, but I may have an opportunity to do so of time allows.
On another note, I thank all of the AfC and NPP reviewers for clearing the massive backlog at AfC (~2800 by June 1). I suspect that the backlog be zero within two days. ToadetteEdit (talk) 06:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
Hello brother, there are two accounts or IP address continuously again and again they vandalising one page, I change it few days ago, they come and destroy and it take alot of time to undo, please how to block them permanently? --ThinkTankResearcher (talk) 19:29, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
@ThinkTankResearcher, the best way before requesting administrative action is to discuss what is happening on the talk page. I have started a thread on the relevant talk page, see the last thread. If anything does not work, the last resort would be to request administrative attention. ToadetteEdit (talk) 05:30, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
@CNMall41, thanks for the followup. I am so confused as to why the socks keep reappearing every now and then, for two years straight. I think that Behappyyar (talk·contribs) appears to be suspicious. They have been creating almost 100 articles on Pakistani biographies among others, but if the checks are confirmed to be true, then they are trying to escape scrutiny. Probably not a good look at them, but I suspect that when they get autopatroll thing would escalate, and also that they might be blocked sooner than later. ToadetteEdit (talk) 05:56, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2025 Issue 11
Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation since our last issue on May 30. Please help translate.
This month we celebrate Loretta and her contributions.
Tech News: The Chart extension is now available on all Wikimedia wikis. Editors can use this new extension to create interactive data visualizations like bar, line, area, and pie charts. The Trust and Safety Product team is finalizing work needed to roll out temporary accounts on large Wikipedias. More updates from Tech News week 23 and 24.
New Engagement Experiments: We're testing out WikiRun, a fun game that lets you race through Wikipedia by clicking from one article to another, aiming to reach a target page in as few steps and in as little time as possible! It's an experiment to explore new ways of engaging readers. Give it a try and let us know what you think on the talk page!
WikiCelebrate: How one librarian brought Wikipedia into the classroom and beyond: this month we celebrate Loretta.
Wikimedia Research Showcase: The next showcase will center around the theme of "Ensuring Content Integrity on Wikipedia" and will take place on June 18 at 16:30 UTC.
Resource Support: Resource Support pilot project is now open to requests. This is a pilot project which aims to support Wikipedia content editors in obtaining resources that they need to improve content on Wikipedia.
Global Advocacy: The Global Advocacy team will be representing the Wikimedia Foundation at several events in June and July – including hosting an edit-a-thon during UN Open Source week and running a booth at the Internet Governance Forum.
For information about the Bulletin and to read previous editions, see the project page on Meta-Wiki. Let askcacwikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!
I thought you should know that you recreated an article that was created by a blocked sockpuppet of an editor who engages in UPE. Your edit summary implied that the history was attributed, however I don't see that anywhere. I'm curious if you just copied and pasted the old article or did you start over from scratch, or? Netherzone (talk) 18:15, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
Good question. I saw that the page was deleted as G5, but the subject is notable so. I looked at Greg's talk page and saw the simplewiki entry linked from it. Since that article is what I expected to be included onto this wiki (enwiki), I decided to import, with attribution, the simple page onto the article. I did not list the article on my userpage for the reason. ToadetteEdit (talk) 18:19, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
Hi! Yes I see that it was G5'd, but I don't see where the attribution was added that it was recreated by a blocked sock. The attribution doesn't seem to be in the edit summary or on the talk page. Sorry that I don't follow your logic about expectations. From my perspective it seems to be helping out a blocked and community banned UPE and their sockpuppet. But I trust that you had other reasons in mind and I'm sure you were acting in good faith, although I'm still confused about the process. And I am not that familiar with all the G5 criteria in relation to immediate recreation... Netherzone (talk) 18:34, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
From looking at the initial edit, I clearly linked the simplewiki page piped with "attribution". But I then realize that the summary wasn't sufficient enough as required by wp:Copying within Wikipedia. I'll try to provide the notice on top of the talk page of the article.
In regards to the recent events, it is entirely unfounded. I read pages and click on random links, and when I find some title (maybe it was deleted) that is clearly notable, I attempt to create the page or keep it in the to do list (off-wiki by the way). I am in no relation with the sock, nor the master, and I was not told to create the article on their behalf. ToadetteEdit (talk) 18:43, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
Since that article is what I expected to be included onto this wiki (enwiki), please don't proxy for Blocked editors @ToadetteEdit. What is your connection with Greg and why do you expect his article to be included? StarMississippi04:52, 14 June 2025 (UTC)
I wasn't actually proxying. I have absolutely no connection with Greg at all. This article wasn't created on request, I created (copied) the page since the subject is clearly notable and deleting it due to G5 (while valid) was a bit excessive. I have no objections to draftification if people disagree with my bold recreation. ToadetteEdit (talk) 05:03, 14 June 2025 (UTC)
You have accepted several of his articles at AfC. You just happened to find one he immediately recreated on Simple.
Thank you for your willingness to accept draftification. I think that is the best course since the speedy was declined. StarMississippi12:52, 14 June 2025 (UTC)
Toadette, on the AfC recreation of the article by a blocked sock, you wrote a comment: Agreed; before reviewing this submission, please be sure of the history of this page and related matters before accepting/declining. but you did not add any links or diffs to that history, nor explain what the "related matters" are. All the history shows is that you created it, not everyone is going to dive deep into the edit summaries to understand the big picture. I can't see how this is useful for reviewers. Please do consider adding diffs or at least explaining on the talk page what is meant by your comment in the best interest of transparency. Without this transparency, I think it just further confuses things. Thanks in advance. Netherzone (talk) 19:11, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
Thanks Toadette! The original editor of the article would frequently inflate claims or use sources that mentioned tangential things not the actual subject, so it does need to be examined closely. It may be notable, but without digging deeply into the sourcing, there's no way of knowing if this specific street clock in NYC (there are hundreds!) is inherently notable. Netherzone (talk) 19:35, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
I have given out an explained rationale on the draft's talk page. For the notability concerns, it is probably a 50/50 chance. I have added one source that discuss the clock as the main subject, and at least one more. But the rest discuss about the clocks in general. I will check in for the final result. ToadetteEdit (talk) 06:01, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Oaklands neighbourhood, city of Victoria
Thank you for your comments (May 23, 2025) on our article. Our article is about our small suburban neighbourhood with a few notable features. There has been very little written (almost nothing specific) about the Oaklands neighbourhood over its 100plus years of existence. We felt that Wikipedia would be a good location for an article on a growing neighbourhood.
As per your suggestions:
We have removed many of the minor links from the article. We understand that they were not appropriate to the article nor to the stands of Wikipedia.
We have edited some of the content to be more consistent with an encyclopedia content.
When you have the time please review the changes we have made and give us more direction as needed. We would like this article to become content on Wikipedia.
@VicKassie21, I will recheck through the draft and will offer further suggestions soon. If the concerns in the decline are addressed, feel free to resubmit the page for review. ToadetteEdit (talk) 06:13, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Hello ToadetteEdit. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Hadayek EI Maadi station, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A typo of that sort would probably be better suited for WP:RFD. Thank you. BangJan199922:20, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
Thanks @BangJan1999 for the correspondence. I thought that the "I" (which I typed wrong on my user page before creation) would not be typed in the search, given that search terms are case sensitive. I will list the page at RfD soon. ToadetteEdit (talk) 04:45, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
Comments at another user's page
Hello, I would suggest that given your own current TBAN from closing discussions you may want to avoid giving advice about it to another user currently blocked for bad closes such as at User talk:Thomasfan1916. Given your TBAN from Wikipedia namespaces I'd also maybe suggest not looking to jump in to user talk pages that you presumably found whilst reading ANI? CoconutOctopustalk08:53, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
For the first point, if my advice is not up to par, then I will fix it. Probably not the wisest attempt to help an unfortunate user. I click on random links and sometimes find some thread concerning a user who has done something wrong. In this case, I sometimes offer my thoughts to help them (not always). If you think that it is a breach of the existing sanctions, you can report me to a noticeboard, but I think I have not done any offense. And for the record, I currently actively visit WP:DRV and saw the submission of a bad close, and looking at the talk page of the concerned user, I feel that I want to give them something. ToadetteEdit (talk) 09:57, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
I don't think it's a breach of sanctions, however I do think the advice you gave was bad advice; a temp block is not suitable in this case in my view (and the view of others per the talk page]. I simply think it is best you not offer advice on an area you yourself are banned from. CoconutOctopustalk11:00, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
In this situation, the editor did not want a full ban. They want a temp ban. I offered another solution, but I know that it might be disagreed upon. I do not think that the advice was bad; maybe my proposals failed. ToadetteEdit (talk) 18:00, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
I would argue the advice was bad; what a blocked user wants has nothing to do with what happens in their appeal. I would also say that a user who is banned from a topic area has no business advising users blocked for edits in that same topic area. Please take what StarMississippi has said on board and just stay away from the 'drama' side of things and focus on content. CoconutOctopustalk20:18, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
Hmm... I will take the comments below. I thought that the ban would be discussed on a notice board and not on the user talk. I can not see the talk page, so I could not verify who disagreed with my proposal. ToadetteEdit (talk) 05:29, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
@ToadetteEdit this is the exact same issue with you using user talk to comment at RfAs that you're blocked from. Please stop. While there are exceptions to your project space ban, it is truly better for you to forget it exists. Participate in deletion discussions if you feel you have to, but don't read noticeboard discussions. StarMississippi12:46, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
Sigh. Exactly? The first offense was clear in that I explicitly mentioned the RfAs in question, in violation of the unblock condition. The second offense, though, was that I had never mentioned or discussed anything that would presumably be in the blocked namespace. Reading pages can be beneficial because it gives hint as to when it is the right time to appeal. By reading previous appeals, I could better understand what the community wants and what the community does not want. By the way, I am slowly forgetting the first offense, to the point that I do not even know that I have broken the rules in the past.
On another note, does the ban even cover reading comments that would persuade me to join in the situation via other talk pages, etc.? ToadetteEdit (talk) 18:06, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
Yes, @ToadetteEdit, exactly. We cannot prevent you or anyone from reading them, but you may not act on what you read. Due to the project space ban, you are not allowed to participate in those discussions at all. Not in a noticeboard discussion, not on the user talks, etc. It doesn't matter if you mention them or not. By the way, I am slowly forgetting the first offense, to the point that I do not even know that I have broken the rules in the past. I'm not sure what you mean to say there TE, but it certainly clarifies that you are nowhere near ready to appeal and should not be thinking about it. As @CoconutOctopus mentioned, this was also bad advice to a user. It's part of why several folks at the last AN discussion thought you should not be mentor. Please focus on content, and deletion discussions if you must, but do not provide advice beyond AfC. StarMississippi01:50, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
I have been adding/creating content for at least a month, and I look forward to increasing my contributions. For that statement above, I was not aware of the RfAs that got me into trouble previously, nor the subsequent comments on the pages. I honestly do not think it was bad advice, but it would be helpful if another also agreed that it was bad advice. Never mind, I'll unwatch that page as well as the other one. ToadetteEdit (talk) 05:27, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
@ToadetteEdit I realize you are young, but please be honest with the community. You say was not aware of the RfAs that got me into trouble previously, nor the subsequent comments on the pages. yet they were discussed extensively at
I am honest in my sayings. I left the RfA department after the first offense and created some articles; through time, I completely forgot about the first offense after the most recent appeal. I am trying to avoid an indef, as that will prevent a potential prolific contributor from sharing some knowledge onto Wikipedia. However, as I said last year during my failed RfA, that the community may site ban me pretty much soon, and it appears that I am making a step by every offense given to an indef imposed by the community.
I was first cautioned all the way back in 2023 by an admin for making unsolicited advice on sourcing, although the recipient was blocked for another reason. Since then, I have largely avoided making drive-by commentary on blocked users' talk pages, but it appears that I had fallen back to my old days. I will try to avoid commentary on the talk pages of blocked users I am unfamiliar with. ToadetteEdit (talk) 19:17, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
As for the talk page edit, how is that edit bad advice??? I still do not get the problem. I have never seen an experienced editors saying that their answers are awful, so why am I singled out?? Who agrees? ToadetteEdit (talk) 18:48, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
Hello again, Toadette, I see that you have decided to re-create another article of the blocked sockpuppet Historyjunkie2024 of the indefinitely globally blocked editor, Greghenderson2006. May I ask what is exactly going on here? I'm really trying to assume good faith, but this is not the first time that there is an indication that there might be some coordination going. I truly hope that that is not the case, but I don't understand why you are resurrecting his sock puppet's work. I also remembered that you were accepting a lot of his drafts without checking the references, or drafts that had other problems. Netherzone (talk) 19:22, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
Thank you Star. When I find the time, I will check it for accuracy and close paraphrasing against the sources. I noticed several spelling errors which I can fix right away. The subject itself is notable since it's registered on the NRHP. Netherzone (talk) 22:56, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
I let @Bkissin know as well that I'm happy to expedite a return once GH issues have been addressed and that this was not an issue with their AfC acceptance. StarMississippi23:02, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
Hi Toadette, thanks for your review. I am puzzled about the citations, however. I am using the inline citations and assumed by using this automated feature, they would be in the format required? Thanks for any clarification you can offer. Steve Skelley4195 (talk) 13:14, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
@Skelley4195, the concern was that the draft's statement is not always cited. You may add more citations to the page, as well as address any concerns. You can then resubmit once you think it is ready for mainspace inclusion. ToadetteEdit (talk) 04:36, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
I did not want to open this, but I do not feel you are able to comply with the terms of your unblock despite repeated warnings. To be clear, you are allowed and welcome to participate in this discussion. StarMississippi13:59, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
All I was providing was more evidence of suspected sockpuppetry on the subpage, and that led to backlash??? I have been creating more and more entries, so an indef would be overkill. ToadetteEdit (talk) 14:03, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
There is no "backlash".
You are not allowed to participate there, and you did. This is a continuous pattern since you "forget" about the discussions StarMississippi14:08, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
"Forget" about the discussion... The first discussion I was not aware of, but I am aware of the previous appeal. I tend to leave old items aside and do the new ones---it is such a shame to be in the "wall of shame" where one gets shot with tomatoes until they finally realize their fault. ToadetteEdit (talk) 14:16, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
I am assuming good faith at all times. I am not trying to deceive you. I admit that I now remembered the previous incident... ToadetteEdit (talk) 15:31, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
Sigh, the community is trying to get rid of me. The ANI thread unfortunately made me so stressful that I could no longer edit the encyclopedia in the way I used to be before. I have requested the pblock to be reinstated, and for my unblock conditions to be voided. I thank all editors and talk page watchers for accompany my journey that spans two years, and I hope this continues. ToadetteEdit (talk) 18:28, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
The community is NOT trying to "get rid of" you, @ToadetteEdit. All that's happening is that you're breaking the restrictions set on you, when you could just not do that. Other editors are understandably getting tired of policing you when you could just abide by the rules placed on you. GraziePrego (talk) 01:53, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
Exactly. But I feel the community (esp. folks at ANI) is somehow a bit toxic (save for a few users). I will not be able to edit ANI so I will be posting my comments here.. ToadetteEdit (talk) 04:41, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
@ToadetteEdit you are welcome to edit the ANI thread as I explicitly said when I notified you. However this is not something you will be able to do if a project space ban goes into place. StarMississippi12:35, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
I understand. But I am currently concerned by the fact that I will be CBANed rather than TBANNED. I have defended my position in the top post. ToadetteEdit (talk) 17:59, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.
Could somebody remove the patroller, rollbacker, and PCR rights from my account. I feel that I am no longer trusted with the rights, and will not need them hanging around with me. Thank you. ToadetteEdit (talk) 10:10, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
I need help with my page, do you have any advice or someone you could connect me with to help me? I would really appreciate iT! EditorCreator5 (talk) 02:24, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
@EditorCreator5 As Toadette is now banned from Wikipedia today (see post directly below this comment, and what lead up to it above) and taking a break, I'm afraid the user can no longer help you. I see that you also posted on the AFC help desk immediately after posting here, and its normally best to ask at one place at a time rather than approaching multiple users/help desks. JuniperChill (talk) 12:06, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
June 2025
Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. Please note that there could be appeals to the Unblock Ticket Request System that have been declined leading to the posting of this notice.
