User talk:MrHumanPersonGuy

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, MrHumanPersonGuy. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! –FlyingAce^✈talk 20:16, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and by the way – reverting vandalism is not considered to be edit-warring, so revert away! :) –FlyingAce^✈talk 20:17, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar quibbles

Affect is a verb (usually) and effect is a noun (usually). But both have exceptions: The medical term affect (e.g., "patient had a blunt affect") is a noun. And effect is also used as a verb when used in the expression "to effect a change."

Another disputed convention which I have seen oft misused of late: "Case and point" -- should be 'case in point' - JGabbard (talk) 04:16, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stubs

Hello! I saw recently on Robert Ellyson you tagged it with a {{stub}} tag. This makes it harder for those who expand stubs to find the topics they can handle. Please use one of the stub tags on WP:Stubs. There are also various scripts out there to assist you with this. Thanks! --Nerd1a4i (talk) 18:03, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

THAAD

ICYMI, an IP address user who has made no previous edits on WP reverted your revert of another IP address user who deleted the same material that the latest IP address user has removed...and also has made practically no previous edits on WP. I strongly suspect that this is a case of sockuppetry but as I'm still relatively new to WP and you seem to have more experience on these kinds of matters, I'd be interested in what you'd have to say with regards to this issue. Any comments that you may have? Wingwraith (talk) 07:40, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What I am aware of is that the IP who reverted my revert (in my opinion) gave a better reason to remove the section in the edit summary than the IP I reverted. -- MrHumanPersonGuy (talk) 10:31, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In Re: Your revert at United Federation of Planets

Of course i don't mean that. If you look at the section, there is a f**kton of unverified (yet bold) statements. I thought I was being kind in not starting to purge the section of uncited material. Or the article, since we're on the topic. The point of the matter is that if fellow contributors didn't feel the need to defend statments uncited since March 2015, why the heck should we keep them int he article? This is an encyclopedia, not Memora Alpha or some slippery-slope fanblog; we need to do better.
As I noted, I reverted you not necessarily because refs needed improving (though they absolutely do), but because re-templating the section conceals the staleness much of the uncited material tagged, and the notice that the material has in fact been ignored for as long as it has. Arguing that, by ignoring your new template, I am ignoring the pitiful few sources that happen to be in the section, is something of a fallacy.
I think its important to spotlight the lack of sources, and how long that lack has been ongoing. Instead of retemplating, add sources. Or purge the uncited statements. One or the other. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 02:44, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Experiences survey

Beginning on November 28, 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) will be conducting a survey to en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:12, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, MrHumanPersonGuy. 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, MrHumanPersonGuy. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi MrHumanPersonGuy! You created a thread called Potentially flawed UI design is causing me to leave blank edit summaries on accident from time to time at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:52, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]