User talk:Wefa

Juana Smith

Well, you did a very good work on the article. I've got no complains of any kind, I've only added some wiki links. Thank you! GhePeU 12:16, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Splinter Cell: Double Agent

I replied to you. :) --Dreaded Walrus 17:33, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

DEFAULTSORT

Yes, in categories the pages shold be sorted by unaccented letters, so ô and o come together. The name in the category will still be accented as per the article. Rich Farmbrough, 22:45 29 October 2008 (UTC).

tv-actor-stub

I added a space at the top of the stub template. See if you like it better this way. Dismas|^(talk) 03:52, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

RE: Question wrt the decline of the Carl Cameron semi-protection

Hey Wefa. I have replied to your question at my talk page. —αἰτίας •discussion• 23:04, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Vandal Messages

Hey, Wefa, I notice you are reverting, great stuff! I have seen some of your warning messages and on this one here: [1] you have put a message. What were looking for here is a message like the 2 below, these go down in Tools such as huggle and then if the vandal keeps going he or she will be reported to AIV. With yours it will not be recognized and the vandal may well continue for a lot longer! It keeps the place tidy! He, he. Any more questions, hit me up! (as neuro says! :D) :) Andy (talk) 20:31, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 21:34, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

SUL

I just asked for user name wefa at French Wikipedia. Wefa (talk) 19:02, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

 Done ! Popo le Chien ^{throw a bone} 09:30, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

AFD relistings

Well there have being a lot of afd discussions that had little comments/votes after 5-7 days since opening the discussion which is why it had been relisted so get more consensus from the community. I would say something like 25% of discussions on a given day are relisted once at least and actually some are relisted twice and even more then that. So yes sometimes discussions can drag for some time although I have not seen any limits on how many relists are allowed although once a discussion is there for like more then two weeks, they often try to get this thing done - that's something I (and probably many other admins) don't like really, something gets dragged for a long period. Also, on your last question, you can still comment on the AFD discussion regardless. JForget 17:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: X3 TC

Cheers, if it is content saying, in reference to the statement about the review from IGN, it could then clear away, and I think with my language skills, it should perhaps be rewritten again. Abani79 (talk) 17:25, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

---

Request reason:

Requesting an IP block exemption, because in this paticular case I tried to edit an article about a pop music topic. When dealing with music, I usually use a VPN provider (HMA, currently), since most music content on Youtube and similar sites is blocked for Germany because of GEMA's war on streaming sites. Suddenly I found myself blocked from Wikipedia. Constantly switching the VPN on and off would be possible but quite annoying for this purpose. Therefore I would appreciate getting the exemption flag. Thanks. Wefa (talk) 16:11, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Granted; no problems with your edits. — Daniel Case (talk) 16:50, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

IP block exempt

I have granted your account an exemption from IP blocking. This will allow you to edit through full blocks affecting your IP address when you are logged in.

Please read the page Wikipedia:IP block exemption carefully, especially the section on IP block exemption conditions.

Note in particular that you are not permitted to use this newly-granted right to edit Wikipedia via anonymous proxies, or disruptively. If you do, or there is a serious concern of abuse, then the right may be removed by any administrator.

Appropriate usage and compliance with the policy may be checked periodically, due to the nature of block exemption, and block exemption will be removed when no longer needed (for example, when the block it is related to expires).

I hope this will enhance your editing, and allow you to edit successfully and without disruption. Daniel Case (talk) 16:50, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Daniel Case (talk) 16:50, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

How to deal with this formatting mess?

I ran across the article Medium endurance cutter.

Apparently, somebody (not me!) put multiple infoboxes in there, which results in a picture and a table formatted over each other - and I have no idea how to clean that, short of deleting the second infobox, which is not an option, IMHO. (Yes, deleting the second infobox magically fixes the formatting). Wefa (talk) 00:16, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

I believe I've fixed the formatting problem—if you're still seeing issues, please let me know. Dori ☾Talk ☯ Contribs☽ 01:45, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Email me if you want to talk by phone or video about the Devyani Khobragade article. Blue Rasberry (talk) 11:54, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Help with Anno 1404 interlanguage links

The article Anno 1404 has no inter-language links. When I try to add one, I get a javascript exception message. It seems to be a system issue. Where can I report this so that it gets fixed?

Wefa (talk) 04:37, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

What other language version(s) of Wikipedia does this article exist on? --Nick⁠—⁠^Contact/_Contribs 04:44, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Nevermind, I think I fixed it. I removed the en interwiki link from the wikidata page (https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q567246&action=history) and then re-added it, and I now see the language links on the side of the article on the English page. I'm not sure why they weren't showing up before, but the problem is solved on my machine. --Nick⁠—⁠^Contact/_Contribs 04:55, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Yep, it worked. Thanks. --Wefa (talk) 04:59, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Template removed Wefa (talk) 19:50, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Carl Benjamin talk page

You wrote "Grayfell, you reverted me without seeking debate. You are not the Lord of this article who can overrule the rest of us if we displease you." Please be civil. Attack the content or the edits, not the editor, no matter how much you may disagree with them. It accomplishes nothing to attack the person, other than to derail the discussion. Thanks. Anastrophe (talk) 01:21, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

You're quoted in Haaretz

If you didn't know: Breitbart Declares War on Wikipedia as Encyclopedia Gets Drafted Into Facebook's 'Fake News' Battle Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:58, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

lol. Thanks for the heads-up! Wefa (talk) 20:50, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Template removed Wefa (talk) 19:50, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alert

Three Lengthy templates removed. Basically one says "You have shown interest in governmental regulation..." and then threatens immediate execution. I also got the same templates about "interest in post-1932 politics of the United States" and "interest in living or recently deceased people".

Whoever wrote that should take a long break from wiki admin and then give his own work a considered review. It is a good thing to be interested in Government and its working, in the people around you, and in politics. Threatening Wikipedians who fit any of these categories within WP with veiled threats of expulsion seems counterproductive - to put it politely.

Apparently, the only fully acceptable Wikipedian does not care about any people, living or dead, gives a blurt about politics and can not muster any interest in government regulation. God bless you. Wefa (talk) 19:48, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Turquoise

Sorry about all the turquoise above. That article is under a lot of possible sanctions. O3000 (talk) 19:39, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

BLPNAME

This violates WP:BLPNAME, which you already know because of the context of the discussion. If you add anything like this to Wikipedia again, I will request that you be blocked.- MrX 🖋 14:06, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

I agree with this warning and add to it. Wikipedia policy and talk page consensus are absolutely against doing anything to identify the whistleblower. That includes mentioning or linking to the current rumor, which claims without evidence to know who the person is. If you don't stop promoting this immediately - if you do it even one more time - you will be blocked for disruptive editing and violations of the Wikipedia policy regarding living persons. -- MelanieN (talk) 20:23, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

note to the uninvolved passer-by: I got these because I linked to an blog article in a talk page that mentions Lord-Voldemort-of-the-CIA - the infamous whistleblower - by name. Wikipedia has lifted the concept of Him Who Must Not Be Named from the Harry Potter novels into reality, and, together with Facebook enforces a near universal publishing ban. Wefa (talk) 20:26, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Facebook

To quote the crux of your statement was "No paper can afford such a block" as if Facebook was having a chilling effect on entities such as the New York Times or any other news source. That is utter fiction; if anything a paper defying such a 'block' would gain a degree of kudos with at least some portion of the populace. WaPo and others have no reliance upon Facebook for circulation nor any requirement to adhere to any policy that their own legal team doesn't advise them to. The idea that Breitbart care at all, given they have published the alleged guys name on 15+ occasions, also utterly debunks that claim (and other conservative sources have also taken it upon themselves to casually name-drop while pointing at other sources in a game of circular referencing). Koncorde (talk) 19:29, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

I don't think you are right. While wealthy of well financed operations like the WaPo or the NYT can afford losing even substantial Facebook reach over articles, in today's climate many smaller sites can not. (though it should be noted that Google and Facebook referrals play a major role in WaPo and NYT page hit numbers) What is interesting that there seems to be hardly any scholarship on the influence of Facebook on the media. Quite a few academics have dealt with how Newspapers use Facebook effectively to boost their influence or reach, but on the other power dynamic there is barely anything. I assume a few years down the line that will change. So for now, I have to rely on guesswork. Given that Breitbart has effectively thrown the towel in this matter (its latest article on the matter studiously avoided naming Voldemort's name) I tend to believe their claim on Facebook's influence. Time will tell. Wefa (talk) 22:46, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the WP:BLP/Noticeboard regarding WP:NPOV. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Carl Benjamin's rape joke".The discussion is about the topic Carl Benjamin. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --Amaroq64 (talk) 09:56, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Rape in Islamic law

I just noticed that you have previously taken interest in the article Rape in Islamic law. Would you consider joining the discussion between me and Vice regent? We could do with third opinions. I would not have bothered you if the discussion had made some sort of headway or if it was being solved at DRN. I opened a discussion at the dispute resolution noticeboard but it does not seem to be receiving attention from the moderators. Here is the link to the discussion at the dispute resolution noticeboard.[2] Perhaps you could contribute on Talk:Rape in Islamic law. Mcphurphy (talk) 12:03, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Horse Eye's Back (talk) 14:28, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 14:36, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

September 2022

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to assume bad faith when dealing with other editors, as you did at Talk:Libs of TikTok, you may be blocked from editing. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. Cut it out with the "lefty administrator" trope eh? — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 17:25, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

You are basically making my point. That article is constantly changed without consent, against the objections of a the conservative editors present, and no editor nor admin saw need to call out, let alone threaten, the editors doing that. AGF was immediately violated by other editors who called my position transphobic; "transphobic" itself is a left wing fighting term trying to pathologize dissent. There is no such phobia, conservatives simply recognize that there are men and women, and, if we ignore the extremely rare cases of biological nonbinaries, nothing else.

But as soon as I point out the discrepancy, as well as the fundamental problem with editing Wikipedia under such circumstances, several people jump at me, you with all your administrators might threaten me on my own talk page. Where was such threats/warnings for those who called all conservatives "transphobic"?

Yep. Thanks for making my point. Wefa (talk) 18:31, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Result of discussion at WP:ANI

The discussion regarding your recent behavior at WP:ANI has been closed. The result was that you are formally warned against further violations of talk page guidelines on issues surrounding gender and sexuality. Additionally, as the action falls under the remit of the WP:GENSEX ArbCom case, this is being logged as a formal "discretionary sanction" under that case. Please tread lightly in this topic area going forward. --Jayron32 18:07, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

thanks for the notification. Wefa (talk) 10:41, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Looking back

Hi, Wefa. FYI I've had to resurrect and reinforce your 2009 discussion here. Kind regards, Bjenks (talk) 02:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)