User talk:Olly150

Write a new comment

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. Katie^talk 14:16, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just have to say, given your comment in your reqeust, that reviewing is entirely about looking at each edit. If you don't like to do that, you probably won't enjoy this particular task. Katie^talk 14:16, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Katie. I think I worded that poorly, in my head I was comparing analysing diffs on protected pages, with the more rapid reverting of graffiti etc in Huggle, an often monotonous task. Just came out completely wrong! However, point taken on board! Thanks again Olly^{say hi} 19:41, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Olly. Not sure why you made those reverts on the A Low Hum page.

Responded on your talk page. Totally correct, my reverts were made in error, now reversed. Many thanks for letting me know!Olly^{say hi} 23:16, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm VirtuOZ. I wanted to let you know that I reverted your last edit (revert action) — the one you made with this edit to Teabagging.
I try to keep my cool here, but I think it is rude or even outrageous, dismissing (reverting) my hard long thorough work on that article, just because "it didn’t appear constructive" to you. Adding wikilinks is nearly the most nondestructive edit possible, and either way – You cannot judge and remove all those links as a one whole! You cannot go for a full revert just because it's faster and more convenient.
If you found some links non-beneficial or inaccurate – remove or fix them.
I was insulted by you. VirtuOZ (talk) 00:05, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi VirtuOZ. My sincerest apologies for reverting your hard work. Given the nature of the page, it was an easy mistake to make. I'll happily hold my hands up to this error, and hope you continue your useful work Olly^{say hi} 00:11, 8 February 2016 (UTC) (posted on user talk page)[reply]

Hello,

I'm very glad to see that you accepted the change from berry to drupe, but it looks like the citation got a little messed up. Just letting you know. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.93.82.35 (talk) 21:24, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! Have a read of WP:Inline citations - it's a good resource on how to write up a reference on wikipedia. This way, any other editor coming along won't be able to disagree if you've got a clear reference! It'll make editing the things you want on wikipedia much easier! As would making an account! If I can help in anyway, just let me know right here, and hopefully I'll be able to point you in the right direction. Olly^{say hi} 21:49, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So Exactly what is questionable about Ron Paul simply having a relationship with Alex Jones and Infowars? This is excellent information for someone who is unaware of the link. I drew no conclusions and made no assertions about anything other than Paul is and advocate of Jones, and is indeed a frequent guest. I can cite 60 sources if you'd like. These are simple facts. Everyone is entitled to them.

Hi Kctruck1805. I take your point on board, that it is completely accurate to include this information on Ron Paul's page. However, Wikipedia has a strict policy on Biographies of Living Persons. They have to be strictly neutral, be completely verifiable, and have no original research. I didn't believe the tone to be completely neutral, using words like "popular", "favourite guest", and also "ever increasing awareness" - claims like this aren't particular neutral, and would have to be backed up by good sources. If you've got more sources, other than just a video on infowars.com, I'd completely welcome you to re-edit with that in mind. For example, your opening line could look more like "Ron Paul has been a frequent (REFERENCE) guest of the Alex Jones radio show and (is reported to be) a supporter of Infowars.com (REFERENCE)". I hope you understand the reasons, and I'd like to thank you for trying to improve the encyclopedia - as long as edits are aligned with the policy mentioned above. Olly^{say hi} 17:57, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you'll reconsider your reversal of position in this AFD. While some of the participating porn enthusiasts may claim that receiving any AVN Award is sufficient to meet NFILM, there's absolutely no consensus of this point, and it's very difficult to make a case that winning an award for "Best Masturbation Video" (under whatever title) is "a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking", as the guideline requires. NFILM also states that its award criterion is one of its "rules of thumb for easily identifying films that Wikipedia should probably have articles about", not a guarantee, and that independent, third party sourcing most be found to demonstrate notability. And that is clearly absent here, as your original comment accurately noted. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 14:22, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Olly150. You have new messages at Harsh 2580's talk page.
Message added 15:54, 22 February 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Harsh (talk) 15:54, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As a participant of WikiProject LGBT studies, you are invited to participate in the third annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign, which runs through the month of June. The purpose of the campaign is to create and improve content related to LGBT culture and history. How can you help?

1. Create or improve LGBT-related Wikipedia pages and showcase the results of your work here
2. Document local LGBT culture and history by taking pictures at pride events and uploading your images to Wikimedia Commons
3. Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Looking for topics? The Tasks page, which you are welcome to update, offers some ideas and wanted articles.

This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. The group's mission is to develop LGBT-related content across all Wikimedia projects, in all languages. Visit the affiliate's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:23, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Olly150. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

1. Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
2. Editor-focused central editing dashboard
3. "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
4. Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
5. Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:12, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Olly150! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! — MusikBot II ^talk 20:48, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WikiLGBT is on Twitter!

Hello Olly150! Follow the Wikimedia LGBT user group on Twitter at @wikilgbt for news, photos, and other topics of interest to LGBT Wikipedans and allies. Use #wikiLGBT to share any Wiki Loves Pride stuff that you would like to share (whether this month or any day of the year) or to alert folks to things that the LGBT Wikipedan community should know. RachelWex (talk) For more information about Wiki Loves Pride, → click here ←.

RachelWex 17:15, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

WikiLGBT is on Twitter!

Hello Olly150! Follow the Wikimedia LGBT user group on Twitter at @wikilgbt for news, photos, and other topics of interest to LGBT Wikipedans and allies. Use #wikiLGBT to share any Wiki Loves Pride stuff that you would like to share (whether this month or any day of the year) or to alert folks to things that the LGBT Wikipedan community should know. RachelWex (talk) For more information about Wiki Loves Pride, → click here ←.

RachelWex 17:16, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Hello, Olly150. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikimedia LGBTQ+ User Group is holding online working days in May. As a member of WikiProject LGBT studies, editing on LGBTQ+ issues or if you identify as part of the LGBTQ+ community, come help us set goals, develop our organisation and structures, consider how to respond to issues faced by Queer editors, and plan for the next 12 months.

We will be meeting online for 3 half-days, 14–16 May at 1400–1730 UTC. While our working language is English, we are looking to accommodate users who would prefer to participate in other languages, including translation facilities.

More information, and registration details, at QW2021.--Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group 02:53, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:Rev ron johnstone.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 13:37, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]