User talk:Soilentred

Welcome!

Hello, Soilentred, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! RJFJR (talk) 14:09, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Language/Personal Attacks

Please avoid Personal attacks in edit summaries. Edits with insults as you did on Template:UEFA Euro 2016 qualification (3rd place) have no place in Wikipedia. There's a disagreement - you and User:Qed237 should take this up at the relevant talk page. --Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 10:37, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 2015

Your recent editing history at Template:UEFA Euro 2016 qualification (3rd place) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Qed237 (talk) 14:38, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Soilentred reported by User:Qed237 (Result: ). Thank you. Qed237 (talk) 14:58, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I retracted this report to give you a final chance. Please join the discussion and leave the template as it was or you will be blocked. Qed237 (talk) 15:02, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Soilentred reported by User:Qed237 (Result: ). Thank you. Qed237 (talk) 15:31, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) 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 necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 15:54, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting

Don't delete information that is correct and useful to have, like you have deleted medal info on the Croatia at the 2016 Summer Olympics. It is a fact that those listed are already guaranteed to be in the top three, so the info there is correct and makes it easier to edit/update once those competitions are over. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.63.29.251 (talk) 20:42, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You should still edit only after they actually win medals, with correct info. Soilentred (talk) 20:55, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Soilentred. 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]

Windows versions

Since these articles are about all releases of the products, not just the most recent, you shouldn't say "Windows 7 or later". Also, are you going to go back and say what versions of Linux, MacOS, and Android they require? It's much better to leave it at "Windows". --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:17, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes system requirements on product pages are not correct or simply not updated, so I personally test each application before making an edit on Wikipedia. Unfortunately I don't have the time to do it for non-Windows operating systems so I leave that info as it is. Soilentred (talk) 14:36, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You know you can't put WP:Original research in articles, right? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:01, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I know. But you obviously don't know how to read. Soilentred (talk) 15:38, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(Be aware of WP:NPA.) When I checked WP:Original research, the first thing I read was "Wikipedia articles must not contain original research. The phrase "original research" (OR) is used on Wikipedia to refer to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist". So "personally testing each application" is clearly not an acceptable alternative to finding "reliable, published sources" and must therefore be Original Research. How have SarekOfVulcan and I misread this? Dorsetonian (talk) 23:25, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist". How would you describe system requirements on official page? Where else should I look for source if not there? Soilentred (talk) 01:13, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Dorsetonian (talk) 18:40, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for not passing on the above notification myself. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:45, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

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; 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.
Edit warring across multiple articles against multiple editors rarely ends well. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:31, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not interested in a war with you or anyone else.

Minimum windows versions

You appear to be WP:CHERRYPICKING your references. For example, you claim in this edit that AIMP requires a minimum of Windows Vista yet the same site clearly shows support for Windows XP. As SarekOfVulcan stated above, the article is about all versions of AIMP, not just the current one. Do you have a convincing argument otherwise? Dorsetonian (talk) 23:11, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how is actual system requirements and not old one cherry picking. In the United States article it say "Donald Trump" for President in info box. Is it cherry picking unless you include all presidents from George Washington to this day, just because article is about all of USA's history and not just recent years? I simply don't see any logic in what you're saying. If you really think that those old versions are important, you can create a section about historical development of AIMP and include all the operating systems that were suported. Soilentred (talk) 23:33, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is a significant difference which breaks your analogy. At the present time there is only one serving president, however there are multiple extant versions of the software and I can still use Windows XP and AIMP together. Conversely, I simply don't see any logic in what you are saying. According to the article, the Windows [Vista and up] version was released in December and the Android version was released in January which, by the "latest version of the software only" argument, means Windows should not be included any more at all. If you retort that there is a version for Windows, it's just a bit older, then I can say that there is a version for XP as well, it's just a bit older still. However, the main issue here is that you are repeatedly making these edits despite multiple editors telling you they disagree; it's a pretty lame edit war, but it is still an edit war. Dorsetonian (talk) 00:24, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

These infoboxes are getting messy. I'm sure we can accommodate system requirements in the article body, but that is where I think they should be. Regarding Opera, the last time I used Opera was on an NT 4.0 virtual rig. Yes, an old version. But I chose Opera due to its outstanding support for older versions of Windows (I could use Google and Wikipedia). I think system requiremens are out of place in the infobox (ad absurdum, should we have the full list of Linux distros with minimum versions?) ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 00:30, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If there was a special place anywhere in article body, I agree that it could be put there. I still think infobox is the best place, but generally I don't have any problem with that. Soilentred (talk) 00:51, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You should have got my ping at Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Software. I felt that going to the WikiProject would help involve software-interested editors. This way, we can look at having consistency across software articles. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 16:13, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Soilentred. 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]

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) 00:17, 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) 02:44, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:36, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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) 01:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:29, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]