User talk:Scu ba

Hello, Scu ba. Thank you for your work on Dan Cantor. Chaotic Enby, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Great job, congrats!

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

ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 21:21, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Scu ba. Thank you for your work on Sarmat Ikoev. SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!

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) 04:12, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Scu ba. Thank you for your work on Alan Alborov (politician). Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!

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

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 16:19, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Scu ba. Thank you for your work on Inal Tasoev (politician). Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!

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

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 01:44, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Scu ba. Thank you for your work on George W. Brewer. Another editor, Sir MemeGod, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good job! :)

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Sir MemeGod}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

SirMemeGod  18:20, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi Scu ba. Thank you for your work on EagleEye (satellite). Another editor, Sir MemeGod, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good job!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Sir MemeGod}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

SMG _chat 17:37, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi Scu ba. Thank you for your work on Zalina Lalieva. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for creating the article! Have a blessed day ahead for you and your family.

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

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 01:32, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Scu ba. Thank you for your work on KP Labs. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for creating the article! Have a wonderful and blessed day!

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

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 07:05, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Scu ba. Thank you for your work on Velyka Novosilka massacre. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for creating the article! Have a blessed day!

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

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 12:03, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Pacific Islands Forum Flag.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:34, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Ingis Mission Patch.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:21, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. 331dot (talk) 08:32, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

???? Where on earth am I edit warring? Scuba 13:22, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Forgot to link it; on Emil Pagliarulo. 331dot (talk) 13:31, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

I don't have any plans to change the current version of the document, but an IP user had been trying to delete most of it, or re-work it into a single section along the lines of "twitter drama" instead of sections being broken down into games. Not sure if that is an edit war. Scuba 13:32, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

You repeatedly reverted the information that is in dispute instead of attempting to engage the other user(I warned them, too). If you have no intentions of editing the article further, though, okay. 331dot (talk) 14:12, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

I have to congratulate you on the Triad article creation - as fine a bit of historical sleuthing as I've ever seen. I'm slightly embarrassed, as my own book is probably the most recent WP:RS to add to the article, but at least I added Mr Al Shamsi's part in the ship's history to your excellent piece! Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 16:36, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I stumbled across the Triad while doing work trying to make articles for all the palace coups in the trucial states. They intervened a few times and it didn't feel right that a headquarters ship didn't have an article. Cheers! Scuba 18:54, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2025 Syrian coup d'état attempt 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/2025 Syrian coup d'état attempt 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.

Asclepias tuberosa (talk) 01:30, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ryan Binkley, 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/Ryan Binkley (4th nomination) 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) 01:01, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Centrist Party of Canada Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Hastings Center Logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Summit Flag.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:58, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Virginia University of Lynchburg Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:04, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi Scu ba! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Planet Nine several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Planet Nine, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Please review bold/revert/discuss. You should discuss the addition, not edit war the content.. Johnjbarton (talk) 21:17, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Planet Nine 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.
You have now been asked four times by three different users to stop adding the material without further discussion: Too early to make this claim. Please see talk page. -- Discuss on talk page please *before* adding it back -- Not an improvement. Please discuss on the talk page. -- Please discuss on the Talk page. There is no consensus to add this content. The paper is unpublished and thus has no peer review. This is not productive. Please stop. Renerpho (talk) 21:22, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

@Scu ba: When I wrote this, I had neither seen Johnjbarton's warning above, nor had I seen that you've since reverted them with the edit summary source is the new york times, listed as reliable on perennial sources. Please understand that this is not a question of reliability, but of building consensus. Renerpho (talk) 21:35, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

@Renerpho we don't need consensus for every addition to a Wikipedia article. this isn't an academic source, its Wikipedia. If the NYT says something that's good enough for me to include it in the article. The joy of Wikipedia is that if information changes, we can go back and edit articles. But gate keeping an entire page, and reverting any edits because they don't get your approval in the talk page isn't healthy editing practices. Scuba 21:52, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

We are not asking for consensus for "every addition", just the one that we are currently discussing. You know as much because you are involved in the discussion. Johnjbarton (talk) 22:09, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

And you still ignore the crux of the problem. Why shouldn't we include this? it's not like the dwarf planet candidate is going to just disappear. Why did you remove its inclusion in the searches section. Scuba 22:19, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

@Scu ba: We don't include it because we don't quite know yet how relevant it is. Yes, newspapers report on it as well as on Brown's and Batygin's reactions; but that's not the same thing as peer review, or as a proper response in a scientific journal.

The fact that we're talking about a featured article here means that extra care is taken to ensure it continues to meet the high standards that are set for such articles. If this story turns out to be relevant, it will be covered in the article eventually. But if we included every story that makes news, the article would become messy very quickly, and its reliability would suffer.

2017 OF201 isn't the only such story that came out recently. If you look through the article talk page, you'll find that this is a recurring theme whenever someone claims to have made a major breakthrough in this story. It was discussed at Talk:Planet_Nine#A_Search_for_Planet_Nine_with_IRAS_and_AKARI_Data a few weeks ago; it was discussed at Talk:Planet_Nine/Archive_7#Preprint_for_potential_candidate in 2022. Even the discussion at Talk:Planet_Nine/Archive_7#No_clustering is relevant, and I'm sure there's more if you go back further into the talk page archive (I could link to similar discussions on other high-quality articles, too). The result in most cases has been a consensus to wait for peer review to finish.

That conclusion is not set in stone (otherwise we wouldn't need the discussions). We could decide to cover those things, if such a consensus emerges. In some of the discussions I've linked, I initially argued in favor of adding such material. In hindsight, I think the decision to wait was correct. Renerpho (talk) 04:35, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

I feel like it deserves some mention at all instead of being totally scrubbed from the article. Scuba 04:41, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

@Scu ba: Maybe. But the way to decide is not by trying to push your opinion, it's by discussing it and convincing your fellow Wikipedians that this is so. I suggest you change tactics, think about arguments that address the issues raised by Johnjbarton, me and others, and then present those on the article talk page. Renerpho (talk) 04:47, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

At this point since you're on my talk page on a section claiming I'm disruptive. nah. I'll just stop engaging and hope people make the right obvious decision. Scuba 05:04, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Per WP:SONGDAB, further disambiguation is only required when multiple songs … of the same name have articles. Since there is no other song titled "D-Day" with a standalone Wikipedia article, I have reverted your move of D-Day (song) to D-Day (Agust D song). jlwoodwa (talk) 16:37, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Wheatland Seal.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:25, 3 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 over $3300 going into it, with $500 the top prize. If you are interested in winning something to save you money in buying books for future content, or just see it as a good editathon opportunity to see a lot of articles improved for subjects which interest you, sign up on the page in the participants section if interested. Even if you can only manage a few articles they would be very much appreciated and help towards making the content produced as diverse and broad as possible!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:17, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi,

I proposed moving the page via the talk page. If you may peruse it for consideration. Sportsnut24 (talk) 16:07, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mario Kranjac, 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/Mario Kranjac 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) 01:01, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi,

I'm just really curious about your recent edits to 2017 OF201 and I mean no harm or anything, but may I ask what's the reason for adding more news sources to the article? I checked that news article you added in your latest edit, and already that article felt odd with the AI-generated image, unfamiliar website and news name. I feel like the arXiv paper and the other news articles already explain the discovery and orbit adequately as far as I'm concerned, so I'm not sure about adding extra quotes from the authors. Well, what we have so far on the article is fine, so no need to change that. But I'm just a bit cautious about adding more news report citations in the future, because I feel like it's getting a bit off-topic when we introduce details like the backstory and inspirations of Cheng et al. But that's just my personal hunch, I suppose. Feel free to argue against that. Anyways, as I said, I'd like to hear what you think about it. Thanks. Nrco0e (talk • contribs) 04:38, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

the outlet has a Wikipedia article, News.am, and are one of the biggest newspapers in Armenia... if you think that disqualifies them from inclusion in this article feel free to remove them. Scuba 04:59, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Interesting, I see. Thanks for clarifying. Nrco0e (talk • contribs) 05:22, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

NP, I was doing unrelated research on a topic on Armenia and the article just popped up and I went 'huh neat, I also edited that article' didn't even register with me that the image was AI generated (I was reading text-only). Sorry about that. Scuba 14:23, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mario Kranjac.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. reppop^talk 20:21, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

User:@Scu ba, thanks for your diligent work in removing links to the MilitaryLand website on articles about Ukrainian military units. That said, your efforts have left us with many elaborate lists of sub-units that clearly originate from MilitaryLand but are now entirely unsourced, and I anticipate that it will be quite difficult to verify them in their entirety through reliable sources acceptable on Wikipedia. I have begun adding "unsourced section" or "citation needed" templates on articles where I have encountered this, but am still not entirely certain how I feel about the information remaining live in mainspace in the first place, and was hoping you might have some ideas. Best regards. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) (contributions) 19:48, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Militaryland does no original reporting. All information on Militaryland can be found somewhere else, even if it requires digging through the Ukrainian defense department website. The information cited as being on militaryland is also available wherever militaryland got them. But that being said it would be a bit of a herculean task to track it all down. Scuba 21:05, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, though I fear that the people editing MilitaryLand may draw their information heavily from social media content that we on Wikipedia would not normally use as a source. And while the website may do no original reporting itself, I suspect that it does by default assume the existence of certain structures, e.g. that every brigade in the Ukrainian military has its own band, which I doubt is independently verifiable. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) (contributions) 17:31, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Given your experience and our previous interactions regarding MilitaryLand, you may be interested to learn that there is a new discussion being held on the website's reliability at RSN. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) (contributions) 09:00, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Ignore my earlier comment the mobile version of Wikipedia took me there saying it was a new comment. I'll look at the RSN Scuba 17:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Regardless, I'd be quite interested in the Ukrainian MoD sources you mentioned, I don't recall coming across that before. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) (contributions) 17:24, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I've been looking, and I could've sworn I saw it on this website but it looks like it went through a total facelift since the last time I was here and the list of units is gone, I'm going to keep looking but this might change my opinion on the usability of Militaryland.net. Scuba 18:46, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I can recall using Ukrainian military sites similar to the one you linked that contained lists of battalions/subordinate units which belonged to particular brigades, such as this and this. Interestingly, the information there seems to have been taken down within the past few months. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) (contributions) 20:05, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Just making militaryland a yellow 'sometimes reliable' source and heavily vetting its inclusion to omit their opinion pieces might be the path of least resistance, but I'm not fully comfortable with that. Scuba 20:16, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I would also be hesitant to support that, though I am not familiar with what exactly you mean by their opinion pieces. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) (contributions) 20:23, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Their website is largely two parts, 1 is a database of units, 2 are opinion pieces / news updates on the going ons in the Ukrainian military which you can see on their front page. the big problem is their database is largely just a reflection of their reporting. Another problem I'm also uncomfortable with that not alot of people are talking about is how they're 'updating' unit logos, with no source as to where they got them, and the official social media pages of the units in question not reflecting those changes. The one that I know of off the top of my head is the 35th Marine Brigade. Scuba 20:29, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from. But also those list of units should be on the Ukrainian MoD website. I'll see if I can't make a few of them link back to that when I'm off work. Scuba 17:38, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Εpsilon Patch.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:35, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your work on Christophe de Menil! I just nominated the article for DYK. I meant to a few days ago but forgot! Hook isn’t really that interesting. Perhaps you can think of one? Thriley (talk) 22:49, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Sure! I just added the content from that one AP article which introduced its own problems making the page almost wholly reliant on it, but I'll give the article another look over and adjust the lede. Scuba 18:07, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Nominations for the upcoming Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

I saw the article you had created for Joseph H. Enos, and was making some additions. After reviewing the content of the article, it appears that the person who served in the New Jersey General Assembly was his father Joseph H. Enos Sr., whose obituary was published when he died in 1973. The details of his election to office still work, but he would not have been the Joseph H. Enos Jr. who served in the Vietnam War. Alansohn (talk) 18:20, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Ah Sorry, nice catch. Scuba 18:25, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

This is not a minor edit. I emphasize again that it has nothing to do with whether the edit was correct or incorrect. If it's more than spelling/grammar/formatting corrections or reverting vandalism it's not a minor edit. I'm unsure whether you truly don't understand WP:MINOR, don't care whether you mark it correctly, or are intentionally ignoring it. But since you've been advised multiple times and continue the problem edits, I must insist that you not mark any edit as minor. You're never wrong that way. Please, I don't want to escalate this. Thanks. Sundayclose (talk) 21:18, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

It is a formatting correction, the link was pointing to the wrong successor. Can you leave my talk page before I have to get an admin involved due to harassment via WP:KEEPOFF. Scuba 21:56, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Changing a name is not a "formatting correction." It's changing content, not formatting. I won't comment on your talk page if you stop incorrectly marking minor edits. Feel free to get an admin. I'm sure they'll be happy to let you know whether you are incorrectly marking edits as minor. I mean no offense, but what is offensive is misleading other editors about changing content. Sundayclose (talk) 22:09, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks man, remember. WP:MINOR is just a good rule of thumb. Cheers! Scuba 22:20, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, and its use can either be helpful or deceptive. Deceiving is not helping. When you mark an edit as minor, you're telling me that I don't need to check whether you changed content. Again, an edit incorrectly marked as minor can be an accurate change in content, but it's still a change in content. Sundayclose (talk) 22:30, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Olympia Fields Seal.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:30, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Scuba. Saw your keep note on the AfD issue on Gunther Fehlinger-Jahn, and I agree with it. However, i think this might genuinely be griefed by his opponents, despite them acting in good faith per say.

I did add an important missing section, which is currently a small list of conferences he has attended, which alone should make him notable.

but the loss of the page might make him be mistaken for an actual nato representative, despite him publicly stating that he isnt from nato. And is a loss of history.

I can’t reply to the discussion unfortunately until in a few days tops, since it got semi protected.

Hope I didnt take much of your time.

best regards JonasJorgensen4 (talk) JonasJorgensen4 (talk) 14:27, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Voting for the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open! A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. Voting closes at 23:59 UTC on 29 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Poor Clares of Perpetual Adoration Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:18, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

On 11 October 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Christophe de Menil, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Christophe de Menil had "a long history of supporting 'difficult' art projects", according to The New York Times? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Christophe de Menil. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Christophe de Menil), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:02, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Scu ba, I wanted to let you know that I reverted this edit of yours because it changed a WP:BLP's lead sentence to describe the figure as an "academic pariah". I explained in the revert why I disagree with the change, but I'd like to write directly to reinforce that in my opinion this is a pretty egregious edit. "Pariah" is a subjective and derogative term that can almost never be used to objectively describe a person, let alone in the very first sentence of an article. We can note that many of his peers consider him a pariah (which the New York Times says here), but that is a very far cry from stating it as an objective fact in the the lede. I would really hope an editor with your tenure would know this is well out of bounds for Wikipedia articles. StereoFolic (talk) 00:55, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Read the source, they also call him a pariah in his first paragraph. Scuba 01:12, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

I did read the source. That is not sufficient for assigning such a pejorative label to a person in objective wiki-voice. The guidelines at WP:BLPSTYLE are very clear about not using contentious, imprecise labels without pervasive backing from reliable sources. StereoFolic (talk) 02:58, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Poor Clares of Perpetual Adoration Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:30, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Starting on 1 November, the month-long 2025 Article Improvement Drive will target a number of content improvement areas and backlogs. Participating editors will be in line for barnstars and other awards; articles from all aspects of the project will be eligible so there will be something for everybody. Interested editors are encouraged to sign up now! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:18, 1 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Palmer Township Seal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:38, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Générations NC Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:16, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I've reverted your edit (for now) that describes Sheikh Hasina as a fugitive in the first sentence of the article and started a discussion on it at Talk:Sheikh Hasina#Label of fugitive which you are welcome to contribute in. I found out after I wrote that that another user had already reverted the label you added for much of the same reasons I had. Undoing other people's good faith edits without providing any explanation in the edit summary is disruptive and evades discussion. Whether we use the term like this is up for debate but the policy on edit warring is not; you have to explain yourself, especially when you're overruling other people's ideas. I understand that there are many good reasons why you support her criminal status in Bangladesh being upfront and I've made some attempt on the talk page section that I linked to to haphazardly address any contentions I could think of but I don't know what your argument is if you don't actually record it anywhere. I know it probably seems obvious to keep this label but it is a legitimate WP:NPOV question. – Mullafacation『talk』 03:44, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

She's a fugitive with a death sentence looming over her, I feel like that's probably the most important bit of information there is on her at the moment, hence why it should be the first thing said in the article. Scuba 13:59, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

I tried to address this point on the talk page discussion. Firstly, to what extent it is looming over her is contentious as it lies in the question of the legitimacy of her extradition. What is in the lead already (that she was sentenced to death in absentia) is an adequate summary that doesn't have any NPOV problems.

Secondly, the most important information at the moment is still her political career because that is the single thing she is notable for. It is policy that her current status in the news at the moment should not be emphasized or otherwise treated differently from other information and it's already given a prominent place in the lead.

Even if we could know for sure that this is the most important information we have about her, to quote Wikipedia:Crime labels, "That a biographical subject is notable for a crime does not necessarily mean that the use of a crime label is the best way to describe that person in the lead." – Mullafacation『talk』 17:54, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

Nominations now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2025! The top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Nominations are open here and here respectively. The nomination period closes at 23:59 on 30 November 2025 when voting begins. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:43, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Correction: nominations are open until 23:59 (UTC) on 14 December 2025. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:21, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:HYPE Nanosatellite.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:23, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, 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 an expanded level of powers and discretion 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 practices;
• 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. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:45, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly reverting content back to how you think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree. Once it is known that there is a disagreement, users are expected to collaborate with others, avoid editing disruptively, and try to reach a consensus – rather than repeatedly reverting the changes made by other users.

Important points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive behavior – regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not engage in edit warring – even if you believe that you are right.

You need to discuss the disagreement on the article's talk page and work towards a revision that represents consensus among everyone involved. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution if discussions reach an impasse. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to engage in edit warring, you may be blocked from editing.

You are edit warring in information that is not only UNDUE, to the lead-- it is factually incorrect, as explained on talk. Please self-revert; it is a highly viewed article and a contentious topic area (american politics). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:47, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

lmao aye aye sir, refusing to read the article I keep citing and then saying that the information in it is wrong is more disruptive than me trying to fix that. Scuba 01:52, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

The cocaine recovered by the Dominican Navy was from the third vessel, not the first, which is exactly what your source says. France24. Here's an AP source from the relevant article (2025 United States military strikes on alleged drug traffickers, where the content is DUE) that says the same thing. The first boat was obliterated by four missiles; nothing was recovered. The article is now in a factually incorrect state, and you've edit warred away the tags alerting the reader to incorrect info. Please self-revert; you're misunderstanding the sources. Perhaps it will be more clear to you if you look at all the maps of the various events (in the Wikipedia article and in the sources); the first strike was nowhere near the Dominican Republic. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:06, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Ah I see the problem now, sorry about that then. Feel free to remove it. Scuba 02:06, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

No, I'm not participating in an edit war. Please self-revert your mistake. Once you've restored the article to a correct state (it is getting VERY high views, so we are misleading potentially hundreds of readers in the time you've delayed), I can take the time to explain all the other issues with the original edit. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:12, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

This edit did not restore the article to the correct version; it only restored the tags on what is still incorrect information. Please revert the article to the corrected state; I'll explain the other issues in more detail later in case you still have questions (detail about each strike is in another sub-article, where it is WP:DUE, see WP:SS). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:47, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Looks good now; please let me know if you have any other concerns or if there is anything still needing explanation (I'll be off for a few hours, getting my ill husband settled in for the night). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:58, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2025! The top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Cast your votes here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2025. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:55, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Deep Blue RIDE! patch.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:16, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for this edit. I had been struggling with how to make the sentence easy to read, your idea about how to do this is better — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 13:00, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons. Thank you. In article Killing of Renee Good you have made multiple negative, unsourced changes about a recently killed person. This is a contentious article with a warning that it relates to: Living or recently deceased subjects of biographical content on Wikipedia. O3000, Ret. (talk) 17:40, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Scu ba, you are within a hair's breadth of being blocked for your disruptive edits at Killing of Renee Good. As already noted above, the article is covered by WP:BLP (as well as multiple Contentious Topic designations, including post-1992 politics for which you have a notification above). If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced disputed content to the article, you will be blocked from editing.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:30, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing Killing of Renée Good for a period of 72 hours for disruptive editing; restoring disputed content to a contentious topic despite warnings. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think 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 ~~~~}}.  Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:19, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

• As you have again restored the disputed edit (while circumventing the partial block due to a change in the article title), I have modified the block to a one-week site-wide block.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:41, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Your edit to 2025 Maldivian protests has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:05, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

You have recently edited a page related to living or recently deceased subjects of biographical content on Wikipedia articles, 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 an expanded level of powers and discretion 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 practices;
• 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. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:34, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi Scu ba. Thank you for your work on John Brisban Rutherford. Another editor, Mariamnei, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for your work on this article. Please add more sources, primarily secondary sources. Thanks and have a great day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Mariamnei}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Mariamnei (talk) 10:12, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

You have recently made edits related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them. This is a standard message to inform you that gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Bridget (talk) 20:22, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Barrington Township Seal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:10, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Berwyn Township Seal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:12, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Calumet Township Seal.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:14, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Tomoko Tamura shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing a page's content back to how you believe it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree with your changes. Please stop editing the page and use the talk page to work toward creating a version of the page that represents consensus among the editors involved. Wikipedia provides a page explaining how this is accomplished. If discussions reach an impasse, you can request help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution such as a third opinion. In some cases, you may wish to request page protection while a discussion to resolve the dispute is ongoing.

If you continue edit warring, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia—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, or whether it involves the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also, please 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— if things indicate that you intend to continue reverting content on the page. ~2026-15124-74 (talk) 02:21, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Chinese propaganda outlets like CCTV, Taiwan.cn, and China Daily are not WP:RS, and they mostly don't even support the statements you added to the article anyway. Labeling your opponent's actions as "vandalism" when all I did was revert your edits citing Chinese propaganda to compromise the article's WP:NPOV is completely unacceptable. You are engaged in a series of repeated, serious violations of WP:BLP and WP:NOR here, and I am prepared to take this to WP:AN/I if it continues. ~2026-15113-56 (talk) 02:51, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Sigh, I'm not breaking any rules, you made your account 2 hours ago to edit solely this one page. See WP:CHINADAILY, I'm quoting directly from her, on her own beliefs. Scuba 04:51, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

You are also adding the completely absurd claim that the JCP and the CCP "where [sic] in constant contact" regarding the Taiwan issue, which (needless to say) fails verification; anyone with the slightest knowledge of East Asian geopolitics knows it to be false, given the longstanding hostility between the two parties. The JCP has repeatedly criticized the numerous human rights violations by the CCP and other issues as "hegemonic", and could not possibly be in favor of the Chinese takeover of Taiwan by force... ~2026-15151-84 (talk) 08:18, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

It's in the source. Click on the citation. Scuba 14:57, 10 March 2026 (UTC) Scuba 14:57, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

No, the source doesn't say that. It only says Tamura emphasized that the Japanese Communist Party has repeatedly communicated to China its opposition to any military intervention in Taiwan by Japan and the United States. There is a significant difference between (a) the JCP diplomatically communicating its opposition to military intervention and (b) the JCP being in "constant contact" with the CCP regarding the Taiwan issue.

There seems to be an ongoing pattern where you either distort what the source says or completely make things up, all while resorting to personal attacks where the only basis is your opponent is using temporary accounts to protect their privacy. ~2026-15433-25 (talk) 00:30, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

opponent is using temporary accounts to protect their privacy did you just admit to sockpuppeting?? Scuba 14:25, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Using temporary accounts is not "sockpuppeting". ~2026-15850-18 (talk) 14:26, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

??? it literally is?? WP:SOCK: Logging out to create a temporary account to disrupt Wikipedia or to evade a block or ban Scuba 14:34, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

No, I don't have a registered account on Wikipedia and cannot "log out" to create a temporary account. ~2026-15850-18 (talk) 14:40, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Then why not use a regular Wikipedia account? Scuba 14:43, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Because I fear I might be harassed here for confronting an editor who, in my view, is repeatedly making problematic edits that violate the five pillars. I am doing this as a volunteer to contribute my expertise and ensure that information in my discipline (East Asian studies) is accurately presented here in English. Your more recent edits to the article are relatively accurate, and I would like to cooperate with you to improve it and remove the problematic parts. ~2026-15850-18 (talk) 14:57, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

So you've never used wikipedia before, have never made a wikipedia account, yet are concerned about confrontation an editor, and for me violating wikipedia's rules. Sure, that's believable. The problematic parts have already been removed, per the first noticeboard discussion you made, even before you escalated it to another noticeboard. Scuba 15:19, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

The suggestion that I am attempting to steer political discourse on the issue at hand or using WP rules that they are misunderstanding is not accurate. My only goal is that the information on this site accurately presents the latest mainstream scholarship and consensus per WP:RS and WP:NOR. Comparative politics is one common methodology in the field (which is how you compare how political parties with similar leanings develop in different regions), and what you did in your earlier edits contradicts all prior work in this area (some of the problematic parts which I pointed out are still in the text). ~2026-15850-18 (talk) 15:25, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard regarding a BLP issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Tomoko Tamura. ~2026-15151-84 (talk) 05:59, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi Scu ba, I see that you’re involved with WP:Biography and interested in politics. I thought you might be open to reviewing some cleanup suggestions for former DOGE member, Antonio Gracias. Here is the link to my request: Talk:Antonio_Gracias#Article_cleanup. If you agree with these suggestions, kindly make the updates. Thank you! Stripedcroissant (talk) 16:20, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Disruptive edits by User:Scu ba. ~2026-15850-18 (talk) 07:17, 13 March 2026 (UTC)