User talk:RCSCott91

You have recently made edits related to the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour. This is a standard message to inform you that the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour 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. Doug Weller talk 17:29, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the alert. RCSCott91 (talk) 17:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is best not to engage with non EC editors as per WP:ARBECR, they are limited to the making of straightforward edit requests only. It's also OK to just delete such comments. Selfstudier (talk) 18:54, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware of that. I'm pretty sure the person I replied to was a US far-right individual, given their comparison of the Proud Boys in America, which is not a proper comparison to the international complexity of Hezbollah.

I'll definitely keep that in mind in the future, especially before spending 10 minutes on a sincere reply to someone who didn't have the common courtesy to sign their comment.

Thanks!

RCSCott91 (talk) 19:48, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Brewster Kahle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wired. 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) 20:08, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that info. I was converting an already existing link but I will keep that in mind. RCSCott91 (talk) 20:26, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DPL bot is there not a bot that already does the bulk of Disambiguation of pages with links? RCSCott91 (talk) 20:41, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RCSCott91 I'm not sure the bot can reply as it isn't a person, but it does have a talk page. I don't think there is such a bot, not even sure how it would work. Doug Weller talk 08:55, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller It would just be a machine-learning bot. Looks like AI is one of the debated topics right now between editors so it might be a while before we get one. I have no doubts that a few of the Python coding editors have had experience with writing and supervising AI. RCSCott91 (talk) 13:57, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed Doug Weller talk 14:29, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ! I received your note on why you reverted the edits I made to Friedrich Kunath's wikipedia page. Makes sense and am wondering if I can make the edits again assuming this time I don't remove any inline references ? Thank you! studiokunath

Studiokunath (talk) 21:44, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Studiokunath Of course. The edits actually looks good and they definitely made the article easier to read, as far as formatting goes. Tip: You can ping @ someone in a talk page to get their attention, that way you don't have to open up a new topic just to reply.

Let me know if you need any help, you did a really nice job, that's why I honestly, hated reverting it.

User talk page Topic Friedrich Kunath revert RCSCott91 (talk) 22:07, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

got it thank you! appreciate the tip as I'm new to editing and pinging, learning the ropes.

one more questions for clarification if you don't mind -- I want to restructure the 'Exhibitions' section of Friedrich Kunath's page, so that it's listed chronologically from most recent to oldest show. Can I just copy paste within the editing mode to rearrange, which will change around the arrangement of the inline references, but not remove them? thank you again for all your help! Studiokunath (talk) 22:12, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should be able to copy and paste within the visual editing mode to do that.

I normally copy and paste in the text editor when dealing with template format, sources, and any mark-up language.

In your profile settings, preferences, editing:

you can toggle on:

-Show preview when starting to edit

-Show preview before edit box

-Show preview without reloading the page

They are the holy grail of seeing what mistake you might have made before you publish.

RCSCott91 (talk) 22:46, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Studiokunath I placed it on your talk page, but I am pinging you here, too.

Not accusing or anything but do be careful of any conflict of interest editing. I noticed your username. I am aware that WP:COI.

If you do have an association, the easiest way to avoid it would be to declare it in your edit summary and/or a general declaration on your user page. WP:DISCLOSE

Again, this is not an accusation; just take it as information if you don't have an association with the subject of the article you are editing.

RCSCott91 (talk) 23:49, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RCSCott91. After reviewing your request, I have enabled rollback on your account. Please keep the following things in mind while using rollback:

• Being granted rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle or Ultraviolet. It just adds a [Rollback] button next to a page's latest live revision - that's all. It does not grant you any additional "status" on Wikipedia, nor does it change how Wikipedia policies apply to you.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear and unambiguous cases of vandalism . Never use rollback to revert good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war, and it should never be used in a content-related dispute to restore the page to your preferred revision. If rollback is abused or used for this purpose or any other inappropriate purpose, the rights will be revoked.
• Use common sense. If you're not sure about something, ask!

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Elli (talk | contribs) 20:33, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the friendly fire! mftp dan ^oops 20:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, it happens while fighting vandalism. Thanks for the notice. RCSCott91 (talk) 20:40, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Soundgarden being sludge metal... hilarious, that notion. mftp dan ^oops 00:55, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That just seems off. Reminds me of when one of my old professors used to joke, that bands like Green Day will one day be considered easy listening. RCSCott91 (talk) 01:29, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As a new user you are probably confused about when to use article talk pages and when to use user talk pages.

• Article talk pages are best for discussing content. For example, if you think that a point is over-cited in the article on the Bharatiya Janata Party, you should explain your point at Talk:Bharatiya Janata Party. The advantage of this is that other editors who are interested in that article can see the discussion. They may have background knowledge that is useful. You may also find that the article talk page (or its archives) already discuss the issue you are interested in - though not necessarily in the terms you want. It is possible that by reading these, you can answer your own question, and you do not need to make a post.
• User talk pages are best for discussing behaviour. (See WP:BEHAVE.)

-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:27, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Toddy1 You are absolutely correct, which is why I went to your user page since you made the edit. As opposed to being disrespectful by simply picking the best two sources of the 14 and rewording your addition Of approximately 2 sentences. RCSCott91 (talk) 12:35, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What edit are you talking about?-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:37, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You go to a user talkpage for that user's actions...overciting to almost a joking level.

I have enough respect for your edits to not change it, even if I would keeping the complete meaning of your words based on the talk consensus.

Literally, going through the edit history entry by entry to find who added it instead of changing it without care. RCSCott91 (talk) 13:05, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Bharatiya Janata Party#The Political Position of the BJP, and read the request by Hidolo at 22:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC). It can then be seen that my edit to the article of 18:53, 20 May 2024 (UTC) was done in response to that - not least because I said so in my edit summary.[reply]

If you think that the number of citations should be reduced - then state which ones you think should be be retained and why - but do this on the article talk page. Then make the edit.-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:49, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Really? I'm not used to it being that easy. I'm used to seeing people fight tooth and nail over every darn word. How refreshing. RCSCott91 (talk) 14:15, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, when you add your name to a support or oppose list on an RfA, please add your name at the bottom of that list, not the top. (Also, your edit made changes to Asilvering's comment, please undo that.) Thanks. Schazjmd (talk) 23:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry. I will undo and fix that right now. Thank you. RCSCott91 (talk) 00:22, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]