User talk:Silent-Rains

Silent-Rains, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Silent-Rains! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Missvain (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Silent-Rains

Thank you for creating Greenwood Park Mall shooting.

User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for the article!

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) 01:01, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

Can you revert this edit please? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_longest_prison_sentences_served&type=revision&diff=1105116556&oldid=1104956823 Shktriib1 (talk) 02:26, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shktribb1 is a sock of prolific sockmaster Cadeken, who has created dozens of accounts and used even more IPs. See WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Cadeken/Archive. IPs in or near Tulare, California always pop up when a registered sock is blocked. They always deny it, but if there ever was a case that satisfies the WP:DUCK test, this is it. Sundayclose (talk) 14:11, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Silent-Rains. Thank you for your work on Lawrence Paul Mills. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article!

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) 03:12, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Silent-Rains. Thank you for your work on Jeffrey Mailhot. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article!

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) 23:48, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Cape Town Prostitute Killer is a very good article. Well done! BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 02:36, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Silent-Rains (talk) 02:55, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Riaan Stander is grim reading, but a great article. Awesome work! BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 09:52, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Silent-Rains (talk) 21:55, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Help with editing

Hi, I could use some help with editing as I am swamped with work. Things that I need help with are making infoboxes, added articles to disappeared lists, and adding sources to articles, I would be very thankful for any help that I could get. Davidgoodheart (talk) 17:38, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ivanova and Olga Tamarin for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ivanova and Olga Tamarin 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/Ivanova and Olga Tamarin 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.

Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:58, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Blue Ridge Savings Bank killings

Hello, Silent-Rains. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Blue Ridge Savings Bank killings, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:49, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Blue Ridge Savings Bank killings

Hello, Silent-Rains. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Blue Ridge Savings Bank killings".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:43, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:2002 University of Arizona shooting

Hello, Silent-Rains. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2002 University of Arizona shooting, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:02, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Route 91 Bandit

Hello, Silent-Rains. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Route 91 Bandit, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:04, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:List of fatal rat attacks

Hello, Silent-Rains. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "List of fatal rat attacks".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 00:08, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:List of mass stabbings in the United States

Hello, Silent-Rains,

I saw that you had been doing some work on this article so I postponed deleting it for another 6 months. It seems like we should already have an article like this one in the main space of the project but apparently not. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:11, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of right-wing terrorist attacks. 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:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
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. ––FormalDude (talk) 05:06, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ––FormalDude (talk) 05:19, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:List of defensive gun use incidents in the United States in 2018

Hello, Silent-Rains. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:List of defensive gun use incidents in the United States in 2018, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 01:17, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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) 00:53, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sapopemba State School shooting

The article Sapopemba State School shooting has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This shooting as you can see does not seem to have had any international significance,and even in Brazil it seems to have been forgotten since there has been no update since it happened.
Furthermore,the page is empty and contains very little information.
Again, I suggest that someone delete the article, it has no relevance and the attack itself has no characteristic that differentiates it from other school shooting

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:01, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weid reason for deletion

You made a deletion with a strange edit summary: "Removed claim with a citation of only a primary source." By that reasoning, all news sources and journalists are unusable sources, according to you. That's BS. Please don't do that again. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 14:38, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your very kind message.

I removed that sentence from that article because it was from a primary source. "The Washington Post says this" and then the citation was the article in which the Washington Post said that. It wasn't the Washington Post that said it either, it was one author from the Washington Post.

Thanks for reading, Jean. Silent-Rains (talk) 17:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was written by Philip Bump, so the attribution could have been changed, but you deleted it because it was a "primary source". WTF? I haven't heard that one before. Are you now going to delete all content from all news sources by all journalists using that reason? What policy are you following? Stop and think about the implications of what you are doing. No one does what you did for that reason.

If it had been from his personal website, we would consider it a primary source, but still from a subject matter expert and very notable journalist in good standing, so we could still quote him. As it's from his writing at WaPo, we consider it a secondary source, our main source of content here. IIRC, we consider articles by the Editorial Board primary sources, but not the articles written by journalists. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 17:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]