User talk:Faronnorth

An article you recently created, Trefechan, 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. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:11, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as 19348 FIFA World Cup, is considered vandalism and is prohibited. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

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. JTtheOG (talk) 00:22, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

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 gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. 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.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.

Girth Summit _(blether) 14:06, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Faronnorth. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Trefechan, 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) 04:01, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Faronnorth. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Trefechan".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:55, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Port of Basel. 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. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:39, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief 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.

Sideswipe9th (talk) 03:00, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Pickersgill-Cunliffe. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Richard Whiteley—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 00:23, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Irish Americans. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. The Banner talk 11:13, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Faronnorth. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Port of Basel, 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) 10:06, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi, just checking where you sourced the track listing from for Lucky You (The Lightning Seeds song)? I thought Fuzzy Birds was a Super Furry Animals song? Is this a different song or is it a cover version? Thanks. --Jameboy (talk) 19:15, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

I see you've addressed it now, thanks. --Jameboy (talk) 12:36, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Anti-Woke Left. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources and it reads like an essay and needs to be formatted correctly. 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. CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:52, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Faronnorth. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Anti-Woke Left, 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) 01:06, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Faronnorth. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Anti-Woke Left".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:16, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Jamie Raines. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. DanielRigal (talk) 20:14, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

You are lucky that I gave you that warning before I checked your other edits otherwise I would have chosen level 3 or 4 instead. I see that you have a history of both constructive editing and vandalism here. I think you need to make a choice. Are you here to help or to hinder? You can't do a bit of both, editing semi-constructively on some topics while vandalising articles on others. If you can't edit articles on LGBT topics constructively then please just step away from them and edit on other topics instead. You also need to keep your edgy jokes out of articles. There is enough indefensible behaviour in your edit history to justify a trip to one of the Administrators' Noticeboards. If you want to avoid that then you need to stop all this nonsense now. DanielRigal (talk) 20:26, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

People who have said gender-critical things, nothing bad about transgender people on buses, by the way, just normal concerns about women-only spaces, the treatment of children, or sporting fairness, will get sections written about them entitled ‘LGBT+ rights’. It’s such blatant false teaming, since 80% of the content there is irrelevant to what they may actually have said. Often, these people have said nothing at all about gay rights; if they have, it’s normally in favour of them, or they’re often gay themselves. Anyone visiting that article now will see that, and the immediate assumption is that this person is homophobic or against gay rights. Faronnorth (talk) 20:39, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

If you bothered to read the article you would see that Raines is bisexual and involved in the wider LGBT community. I suggest that you forget this silly "false teaming" slogan that you have acquired. It's not as impressive as you seem to think. DanielRigal (talk) 20:44, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

I said some of them are gay themselves, also it might be a good idea to take some of the diatribe from your user page and copy/paste it into ChatGPT and ask it "Can you list the fallacies in this statement?". Faronnorth (talk) 13:27, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Sharron Davies, you may be blocked from editing. DanielRigal (talk) 20:27, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Mfield (Oi!) 20:28, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Just for the record, that block was nothing to do with me. I didn't report you. Anyway, it's probably for the best. It gives you a day to calm down and think about what I said. You are on thin ice but you can still avoid plunging through it if you want to. DanielRigal (talk) 20:41, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Trolling Talk:LGB Alliance by claiming that they would welcome trans people, but only if they were heterosexual, is not helping anybody. Please drop it. DanielRigal (talk) 12:44, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I did not make that claim and if I did it wouldn't make sense. Go back, re-read what I said, and form a counterpoint against that. Faronnorth (talk) 12:47, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

You posted "transman [sic] in a relationship with a woman, would be welcomed in the group.". I think you deliberately misspelt trans man to be gratuitously offensive. Even if that was a mistake, you clearly say that the only trans man welcome at the LGB Alliance would be a heterosexual one (or at least a bisexual one in a heterosexual relationship with a woman). You are playing games. You know what you are doing. You have been blocked for it before. Please just stop. DanielRigal (talk) 12:55, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

No you're trolling, you're being wilfully obtuse; you knew exactly what I meant. I said a transman and a woman in the sense that they're both female, and because they believe same-sex attraction is based on sex, not gender identity, you're just doubling down on the sort of homophobia they exist to push back on. You should not be removing good-faith comments. Faronnorth (talk) 00:24, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I do not feel any need to indulge this obvious nonsense. It was not a comment made in good faith and following it up with a baseless personal attack, deliberately repeating the offensive misspelling of "trans man" and describing trans men as "female" doesn't help you at all. It all serves to demonstrate bad faith. You have a long track record of mixing vandalism in with your other edits. You clearly do not respect Wikipedia. As I told you before, you need to decide whether you are here to help or to hinder. You can believe whatever you like but if you continue to disrupt Wikipedia by trolling then you can expect a trip to one of the Administrators' noticeboards. I believe that the most likely outcome would be a topic ban but, given your long history of disruption, it could easily be worse than that. I wasn't the one who reported you the last time you got blocked. I'd rather not be the one to have compile a report of all your bad edits. Believe me, that would be extremely tedious work. I advise you take advantage of my laziness and just let it drop. You are clearly capable of editing constructively in other areas, when you want to. You could do that instead. Surely that is preferable to this? DanielRigal (talk) 01:02, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

You're the one who started with a personal attack by accusing me of trolling. I used 'transman' because writing 'trans man' would imply that I’m referring to a different kind of man, in the same way we say 'black man.' Accepting that would require embracing a circular definition of 'man' based on internal feelings. If you have a definition that isn’t circular and doesn’t rely on accusing others of moral failings for rejecting it, I’d like to hear it, because not accepting that definition is not a moral position, it’s an ontological one. I also referred to a female as a female to illustrate that sexual attraction is rooted in biological sex; I’m not apologising if that offends you. Faronnorth (talk) 02:16, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't want an apology. I only want you to stop being disruptive. I have no expectation of changing your views and I'm not going to argue any further. I won't take any action unless you disrupt Wikipedia again. You've had enough warnings. You know where you stand. DanielRigal (talk) 02:28, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

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 Faronnorth. Thank you. - Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 23:37, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Vanamonde93 (talk) 23:16, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

• You have been blocked because your edits consistently show you are unwilling to work within our framework to build an encyclopedia. This isn't about your opinions, but the manner in which you have chosen to express and act on them. Any unblock request will need to address your ability to build content based on good sources. Vanamonde93 (talk) 23:17, 13 March 2026 (UTC)