User talk:Plmoin2514

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Thailand Digital Arrival Card, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 19:58, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Pythoncoder was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Sourced entirely to government websites — please add a few independent sources to prove notability

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Malaysia Digital Arrival Card (MDAC) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

—pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 19:22, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback I have found more references now and re-submitted it again. Plmoin2514 (talk) 19:57, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Please be careful about what you say to people. Some remarks, such as your addition to Talk:Thailand Digital Arrival Card can easily be misinterpreted, or viewed as harassment. Wikipedia is a supportive environment, where contributors should feel comfortable and safe while editing. Accusing an editor with 20 years experience and over 80,000 edits of operating sockpuppets is a very serious charge. You had better have some very solid evidence to back that accusation up. —C.Fred (talk) 19:57, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Did you post this to the wrong page? I have not made any accusations beyond vandalism issues? Plmoin2514 (talk) 19:58, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

This edit, with the edit summary "reverted ongoing vandalism from Thai Visa Centre sock puppets " —C.Fred (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

I'm sorry but that was not made in reference to you. I'm a little bit slow to submit my edits and it seems it is overwriting changes that others have made just seconds earlier. I was referring to the multiple 4G proxy IP addresses being used to vandalize the page, not you. Apologies for any misunderstanding, I will hold off any edits. Plmoin2514 (talk) 20:14, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Given that your edit was specifically to revert an edit by a named user, that doesn't hold a lot of water. While there have been three IP addresses editing the article in the past 24 hours, none of them have edited the talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 20:18, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

I see who you are talking about now, is that Paul012? Yes, sorry about that. I might have been in too much of a hurry. Plmoin2514 (talk) 20:25, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Thailand Digital Arrival Card shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Coupled with your accusations against another editor, there are enough hallmarks of bad-faith editing here that your account could be blocked whether you violate 3RR or not. —C.Fred (talk) 20:02, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Again, I didn't make any accusations against you, I've no idea what you are referring to? Plmoin2514 (talk) 20:04, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

I just added a link to where you made the allegation against Paul 012. —C.Fred (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

• I also just deleted a large chunk of text you copied from raiyai.com. Please review WP:COPYVIO. —C.Fred (talk) 20:21, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

  Okay sorry thanks. Plmoin2514 (talk) 20:25, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

  @C.Fred User:Plmoin2514 has not stopped their harassment of other editors. I became aware of this pattern after tracking their edit history.

  Firstly, I found that Plmoin2514 is unhappy with the existence of The Thaiger, a Thai gossip media outlet, and appears extremely sensitive about this topic and the Thai visa scam issue. They have made repeated personal attacks and accusations of sockpuppetry against several editors who disagreed with them as Plmoin2514 did above.

  I have been accused and have received multiple attacks and harassment from them after I became involved in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Thaiger. I am not alone in this; they have treated @ManoiCMU and @KhantWiki in the same manner. See Talk:The Thaiger and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Thaiger and Talk:Thailand Digital Arrival Card. They accused the creator of The Thaiger article of being a paid editor and a member of The Thaiger’s staff, and they further claimed that @KhantWiki and I are operating an SEO scam for The Thaiger.

  I participate in many AfD discussions across different topics. In the AfD for The Thaiger, the nominator was Plmoin2514. After KhantWiki, who is also a junior Burmese editor, voted, Plmoin2514 reacted aggressively. Recently, I was monitoring KhantWiki’s contributions due to concerns about possible AI-generated content and left a warning on his talk page. After reviewing the situation, KhantWiki’s AfD vote was valid and unproblematic. The real issue appears to be the nominator, who seems to be acting under WP:IDONTLIKEIT and personal hostility toward The Thaiger, possibly because the outlet has been operated in visa scam.

  I discovered that Plmoin2514 has nominated this article multiple times; this was the second AfD. I became interested in this pattern and examined their edit history further. Their edits show a narrow focus almost exclusively on visa-related topics and The Thaiger (formerly Phuket Gazette). After the AfD closed, they became inactive. When ManoiCMU recreated the article under a different name, Plmoin2514 became active again, and their first action was to attempt deletion. This behavior is unusual. After reviewing The Thaiger talk page, I observed similar harassment directed the creator. They also accused the article creator, ManoiCMU, of being a sockpuppet of User:Greenmangopassion and a paid editor for The Thaiger.

  My own involvement was limited to providing source analysis on Phuket Gazette not Thaiger and voting at AfD based on sources. Plmoin2514 did not attempt to counter the sources presented. Instead, they chose to attack editors. They accused me and @KhantWiki of being sock accounts of The Thaiger and of having undisclosed relationships and/or working together to boost SEO for The Thaiger during the AfD discussion.

  Since 2018, as a senior Burmese editor, I have never edited Thai-related topics and have never edited The Thaiger or its former article Phuket Gazette. I only voted in this recent AfD based on a fair assessment and have no connection with any Thai editors. This can easily be verified through my edit history and AfD participation. They also accused me of being connected to the article creator ManoiCMU and claimed that KhantWiki is likewise connected to ManoiCMU. If they believe this, they are free to verify it using the Editor Interaction Analyzer or to report the matter at WP:SPI.

  For transparency, interaction checks are available here: and

  Because Wikipedia is banned in Myanmar, I can only edit with a granted IP block exemption. Accusing me of being a Thai editor or a member of The Thaiger team is unfounded and unreasonable. My created topics are unrelated to Thailand, and I have never edited or created Thai-related articles. I’m an AfD fighter and make strong opposition in many AfDs.... my AfD stats here: . I did not give a vote alone in this Thaiger AfD. Of course, if I had participated in only one AfD in my whole Wikipedia life, assuming this about me might make sense. But I did not and I can no longer tolerate this pattern of behavior.

  One additional concern is that Plmoin2514 has not attempted to evaluate the sources I presented at AfD. Instead, their actions focus solely on accusing editors and attacking the article.

  For example, they repeatedly claim that The Thaiger is involved in visa scams and SEO scams. Under WP:V , such claims require reliable sources. The only source they provided at AfD was a Khaosod English article, which does not state that The Thaiger is involved in visa scams. I also searched for any attached PDF or official list of scam websites in that article and found nothing that verifies this claim. If reliable verification exists, I would support adding such information to the article.

  Since then, Plmoin2514 has continued to harass me and other editors in various ways. I was surprised to discover that they have made similar accusations against other editors in the past. Hteiktinhein (talk) 11:49, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:Arrival card indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Paul_012 (talk) 20:33, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Please do not accuse editors of paid editing without evidence. Such claims are serious and fall under personal attacks per WP:NPA and WP:AGF. If you have a policy-based concern, please raise it properly. Thank you. ManoiCMU (talk) 12:18, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Phuket Gazette, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, proposed deletion is disallowed on articles that have previously been de-prodded, even by the page's creator, or which have previously been listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{proposed deletion}} template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! —C.Fred (talk) 13:32, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi Plmoin2514! I noticed that you've made several edits in order to restore your preferred version of Phuket Gazette. The impulse to repeatedly undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure that you're aware of Wikipedia's edit warring policy. Repeatedly undoing the changes made by other users in a back-and-forth fashion like this is disallowed, even if you feel what you're doing is justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages in order to try to reach a consensus with the other editors involved. If you are unable to come to an agreement at Talk:Phuket Gazette, please use one of the dispute resolution options that are available in order to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of repeatedly reverting other editors' changes can help you avoid getting drawn into edit wars. Thank you. Yue🌙 (talk) 20:25, 27 December 2025 (UTC)