DZ
DefZone.Net

Kien thuc cong nghe & giai tri

Wiki Article

User talk:Kiwimanic

Nguồn dữ liệu từ Wikipedia, hiển thị bởi DefZone.Net

Xem trên WikipediaBài ngẫu nhiên khác

Welcome!

[edit]
A plate of chocolate chip cookies.
Welcome!

Hello, Kiwimanic, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Schwede66 03:34, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment Court has been accepted

[edit]
Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment Court, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Ca talk to me! 13:21, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited How to Fix a Drug Scandal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amherst. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:23, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Murder of Urban Höglin and Heidi Paakkonen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Post.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

[edit]

Information icon Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 has an edit summary that appears to be inadequate, inaccurate, or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. McSly (talk) 00:21, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@McSly: That's very vague. Please explain what you mean. Kiwimanic (talk) 00:23, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That change here was clearly not about "Remove uneccesary technical data from lede", but instead replacing the intro wit a completely different view on the cause of the crash. --McSly (talk) 03:34, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Warning icon Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, you may be blocked from editing. WikiHannibal (talk) 11:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also to note for Kiwimanic, WP:ONUS. For the article's content, it would be better to discuss any changes on the article's talk page. – The Grid (talk) 14:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Guardian is a reliable source. The link you provided does not work. The final report was over 1,500 pages and does not seem to be avilable on the Wayback machine. So I am doubtful that you have read it and can say with any authority that the final report did not acknowledge “unlawful interference". The Guardian has a reputation for reliable reporting. I very much doubt they would make that claim if it wasn't in the report. Kiwimanic (talk) 07:50, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Post office Scandal

[edit]

I am delighted with your edits. I am sorry if I have inadvertently undone anything and will stop now and read in case you want to redo. Jacksoncowes (talk) 08:32, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited British Post Office scandal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DWP.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Criminal Cases Review Commission (New Zealand), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Andrew Little.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Murder of Mellory Manning, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blenheim.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wrongful conviction of David Lyttle

[edit]

Hello my new friend. I hope you are fine. I have tagged this page as having a lead section that is far too long and detailed. It now essentially re-presents everything in the article itself. I could cut it back, but I thought I should give you an opportunity to do so. Keep up the good work on Wikipedia. Best wishes, BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 07:54, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The length guidelines you quote say "The leads in most featured articles contain about 250 to 400 words." The lead to this article contains 379 words. I don't see a problem. Kiwimanic (talk) 08:07, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mike White (journalist), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages North & South, Peter Ellis and Allan Hall.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Control copyright icon Hello Kiwimanic! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Draft:The seizure of Shaun Allen's farm, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted material from other websites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from https://ndhadeliver.natlib.govt.nz/webarchive/20180405200007/http://www.noted.co.nz/currently/crime/cannabis-farm-shaun-allens-25-year-battle-to-prove-his-innocence/, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate your contributions, copying content from other websites is unlawful and against Wikipedia's copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are likely to lose their editing privileges.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

It may also be necessary for the text to be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

See Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template of the permissions letter the copyright holder is expected to send.

Otherwise, you may rewrite this article from scratch. If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Draft talk:The seizure of Shaun Allen's farm saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Diannaa (talk) 15:40, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dianna
You say I appear to have copied material from from https://ndhadeliver.natlib.govt.nz/webarchive/20180405200007/http://www.noted.co.nz/currently/crime/cannabis-farm-shaun-allens-25-year-battle-to-prove-his-innocence/
I cannot even access that page...nothing comes up when I click on the link you provided... Kiwimanic (talk) 15:53, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I get a message that says "ndhadeliver.natlib.govt.nz Additional security check is required. This service is temporarily unavailable due to maintenance or a problem, please try later" and below is a capcha box that says "I an human". When I verify that I am human by ticking the box, the page loads. It is an article titled "Cannabis farm: Shaun Allen's 25 year battle to prove his innocence" by Mark White, dated 7 March 2018. Diannaa (talk) 16:59, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dianna, I am not an expert on Wiki copyright policy. However, I found a sentence under text copyright violations 101 which says: Identify with what edit the dubious content has been copy-pasted, and mention that on the article's talk page.
I don't see any mention of any concerns at all on the Talk page - so your approach seems rather drastic. Could you please post specific phrases, sentences, etc from the Draft which come directly from the article in the Natlib website - so I can get some sense of what you are concerned about. Kiwimanic (talk) 04:43, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The capcha prevents me from comparing the pages directly using Earwig's tool so I have temporarily pasted the content into a sandbox. You can now view the overlap here. Overlapping material is highlighted. Diannaa (talk) 13:19, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Mike White is the author of "A Failure of Integrity" which is the source of much of the content in the draft page about Shaun Allen. He has written to Wikipedia and received a reply from Alfred Neumann which said:
Dear Mike White, Thank you for your permission to use media file(s) on Wikimedia Commons.
For us to process your contribution(s), we need to know the specific name or link to the page(s) on Wikimedia Commons to which you have uploaded them. If you have not yet uploaded, please continue to upload the file(s) and let us know when done.''
Mr White has never edited anything on wikipedia and does not know how to upload the article to Wikimedia Commons. Can you provide clear instructions on how to do this please. Kiwimanic (talk) 20:36, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Commons is a separate website that deals with images. For Wikipedia, please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent.
If Mr White sold the article to North & South Magazine they are likely the copyright holders now, and their permission would be required instead of his.Diannaa (talk) 02:34, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand Mr White has given permission for his article to be donated accordingly. In the meantime, I have rewritten the article and tested it with a copyright tool that says the page is now only 4.8% similar. However, that figure is partly based on words which cannot be changed - in particular the Institute of Environmental Health & Forensic Sciences (IEHFS). Kiwimanic (talk) 21:09, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not necessary to get it down to zero. Job titles, names of schools, and the like are okay to keep. I have moved the content from the temporary page to the draft. Thanks. Diannaa (talk) 21:21, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The seizure of Shaun Allen's farm (February 19)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AlphaBetaGamma was:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
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.
ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 12:31, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please explain which sources cited in the references are not reliable. Kiwimanic (talk) 19:13, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Kiwimanic! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 12:31, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Seizure of Shaun Allen's farm has been accepted

[edit]
Seizure of Shaun Allen's farm, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 23% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Greenman (talk) 11:27, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

October 2025

[edit]

Information icon Hi Kiwimanic! I noticed that you've made several edits in order to restore your preferred version of Christopher Luxon. 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:Christopher Luxon, 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. ―Panamitsu (talk) 04:13, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Panamitsu I noticed that you haven't posted the same message on Roger 8 Roger's Talk page. If you take a look at it you will see he has recently been accused of disruptive editing. Kiwimanic (talk) 04:33, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. Yes I do agree with those accusations to be honest but here I was considering WP:3RRBLP which says that edit warring does not include "removing contentious material that is libelous, biased, unsourced, or poorly sourced according to Wikipedia's biographies of living persons (BLP) policy." Roger 8 Roger was removing text that fit that definition in my opinion, so I don't think he was edit warring, but of course what falls under it can be quite controversial so I do understand if you disagree. ―Panamitsu (talk) 05:45, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing libelous or defamatory about the statement that AirNZ's stake in Virgin was sold at a loss. It is well documented in multiple sources. The text that Roger removed does not come anywhere near defamatory and so is of no relevance to BLP. Kiwimanic (talk) 19:06, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The sentence was removed because it said Luxon himself sold and lost millions. I cannot help you further if you don't understand the difference between a person and a company. It was also removed because it was not important enough to be mentioned here - it was one of many business decisions made by AIRNZ while he was CEO. You have to acquaint yourself with wp:weight and wp:balance. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 23:23, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Contentious Topics (BLP)

[edit]

Biographies of living persons are considered a contentious topic on Wikipedia and there is a higher standard for both sourcing and behaviour in the topic area. Traumnovelle (talk) 18:32, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:01, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roger 8 Roger comments

[edit]

I removed your thread about Roger 8 Roger from Talk:Christopher Luxon. Concerns about an editor's behaviour that don't specifically relate to content should be posted on a user talk page and not an article talk page.

I recommend you re-post it on his talk page. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:18, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 2025

[edit]

Information icon Hello! Thank you for your efforts to improve Wikipedia, and in particular for adding references, as you did to Christopher Luxon! However, adding a bare URL is not ideal, and exposes the reference to link rot. It is preferable to use proper citation templates when citing sources, including details such as title, author, date, and any other information necessary for a bibliographic citation. Here's an example of a full citation using the {{cite web}} template to cite a web page: 

Lorem ipsum<ref>{{cite web |title=Download the Scanning Software - Windows and Mac |publisher=Canon Inc |work=Ask a Question |date=2022 |url=https://support.usa.canon.com/kb/index?page=content&id=ART174839 |access-date=2022-04-02}}</ref> dolor sit amet.

which displays inline in the running text of the article as:

Lorem ipsum[1] dolor sit amet.

and displays under References as:

  1. ^ Download the Scanning Software - Windows and Mac". Ask a Question. Canon Inc. 2022. Retrieved 2022-04-02.

If you've already added one or more bare URLs to an article, there are tools available to expand them into full citations: try the Citer tool, or in the wikitext editor, try the reFill tool, and in the Visual Editor, the reference dialog can convert some bare urls into a full citation. Once again, thanks for adding references to articles. ―Panamitsu (talk) 06:40, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

[edit]

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:29, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 2025

[edit]
Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Christopher Luxon. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.
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 ~~~~}}.  Aoidh (talk) 16:26, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please also note that this edit summary stating "Do not remove accurate well sourced info. Thats disruptive editing" is an inaccurate description of disruptive editing, as verifiability does not guarantee inclusion, particularly in a biography of a living person. - Aoidh (talk) 16:32, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Aoidh please point to the edits where you believe I violated the three revert rule. Kiwimanic (talk) 18:11, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(1) 07:13, December 29, 2025 is revert of this edit. (2) 4:53, December 29, 2025 is a partial revert of this edit. (3) 01:03, December 29, 2025 is a revert of this edit. (4) 21:21, December 28, 2025 is a partial revert of this edit. - Aoidh (talk) 19:04, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
icon
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Kiwimanic (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

No one has specified which three edits I made within 24 hours that are a violation of the 3RR rule Kiwimanic (talk) 18:40, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

[1][2][3][4]. You should have taken this to the talk page to get consensus well before it got to this point. I'll also point out that 3RR is a bright-line rule, and you don't need to break 3RR for a series of edits to be considered edit warring. stwalkerster (talk) 19:01, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

The block specifically says I am blocked for breaking the 3R Rule. If I didn't break it, it should not be mentioned, let alone given as the reason for the block. Kiwimanic (talk) 19:45, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As explained above, you did. - Aoidh (talk) 20:04, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not make accusations without disclosing the evidence. Show me the three edits that are a breach of 3R. Kiwimanic (talk) 20:14, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Panamitsu I believe you were the editor who originally claimed I breached the 3R rule on Chris Luxon's Talk page. As far as I can tell, subsequent editors have assumed you were correct and used that to impose a block on me. Please provide links to the three edits that you claim breached the 3R rule. Kiwimanic (talk) 20:25, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These diffs have been provided above. - Aoidh (talk) 20:26, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok those edits cover two entirely different pieces of material. I thought the 3R only applied to three edits of the same material. My mistake. Kiwimanic (talk) 20:44, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:3RR notes that An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period. - Aoidh (talk) 20:48, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What did you post this for. I acknowldged my mistake. Kiwimanic (talk) 21:03, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

[edit]
Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Offender9000 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Offender9000. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
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 ~~~~}}.  Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 02:39, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]