User talk:Angry candy

Proposed deletion of Sinucta muculata

The article Sinucta muculata has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't seem to be any evidence this exists aside from Wikipedia mirrors. Possibly an OCR error (I can't access cited source)?

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Plantdrew (talk) 04:28, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A solution.

Just add the descriptive "constituent" to England, Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland. That way, you'll have a distinction between them & the UK.
The United Kingdom is a "country", made up of four "constituent countries". GoodDay (talk) 15:34, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. That's it.

Concerns

I'm a tad concerned that one of the editors' participating at the United Kingdom RFC, is over-reacting, with his repeated objections of its being held. He might be entering WP:BLUDGEON territory, IMHO. GoodDay (talk) 15:49, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It's increasingly evident that he's arguing from an emotional and political position. I'm prepared to seek dispute resolution or arbitration if necessary. Do you have any recommendations on that front? I am not yet familiar with any one process but I'm patient and willing enough to learn. (You might have noticed that I pinged this user to seek his comments at this point by way of preempting an edit war). Angry Candy (talk) 16:03, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm hoping, when he returns to the RFC. He'll lower the volume & there won't be a need to address his behaviour. But I must admit, his questioning the neutrality of the RFC (including at Wikipedia:Requests for comment's talkpage), is bordering on disruption. GoodDay (talk) 16:12, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, here's hoping. I hadn't seen his comment at the RfC page. Thanks for that. I'm not overly concerned. One way or another, peace and logic will win out. Angry Candy (talk) 16:29, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Iceman (performer) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Iceman (performer) 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/The Iceman (performer) 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.

Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:16, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Atelier Fauni for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Atelier Fauni 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/Atelier Fauni 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.

Arthistorian1977 (talk) 13:19, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blog spamming

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Centre for Contemporary Arts. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Haoreima (talk) 10:02, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which links are your referring to? Angry Candy (talk) 11:10, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Haoreima. I've really improved that article over the last few days and added plenty of high-quality inline citations from news media. I also reduced the number of external links considerably. So it's a bit unpleasant to get a message like this in light of the work I've voluntarily done in the spirit of improvement. The blog you're referring to seemed perfectly acceptable (to me) to include as an external website connected to the CCA and containing further information on its history. You were obviously free to remove it but a message like this is unpleasant and doesn't do much to support the spirit of collaboration. Angry Candy (talk) 11:41, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The diff link is here. The original blog link (that you have added) is https://thirdeyejazz.blogspot.com/ . I have seen you have been improving the article to a great extend. But if you will have a second closer look at the diff link (in desktop version), you will see that wikipedia automatically tags it as "Tag: citing a blog or free web host". It shows that the link is unacceptable to wikipedia. I hope you are or you should be aware of WP:RS and WP:LINKSPAM. I am not cyberbullying you nor I am trying to victimize you. I didn't revert your entire edits. I simply removed that particular link you have added. In fact, the reason why I left that message in your talk page is to make you aware or atleast to remind you about the wikipedia policies and guidelines. It's not meant to discourage editors but rather to help them improve their performances in future. Have no hard feelings. I am always helpful to every Wikipedians. Thanks❤! Haoreima (talk) 14:16, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. Thank you. But maybe temper your messages next time. There's no need to be officious or to assume foul play. We're all volunteers here. 18:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC) Angry Candy (talk) 18:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please be cautious of WP:NPA if your statement "There's no need to be officious or to assume foul play." is referring to me. And regarding the language used in the message, it is not my own words but generated by a common wikipedia template {{subst:uw-spam2}}. Once again, I am telling you I have no bad intentions. You are free to improve the article but please don't add any bad source. That's it. If you feel offended, accept my apologies! :-) Haoreima (talk) 20:10, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

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) 00:05, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]