User talk:Nezahaulcoyotl

Nezahaulcoyotl, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Nezahaulcoyotl! 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 Mz7 (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

November 2019

Hello, I'm Nixinova. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks.

How to add sources

See Help:Referencing for beginners. Note that for books you'll need page numbers. Also, a snippet isn't a source - the next sentence, the one you can't see, might say "However, this has since been shown to be wrong". I've reverted you at El Dorado not because it's a snipped but because as a mission magazine it fails WP:RS for this. Doug Weller talk 15:08, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

A. moyseyi current status

Greetings, I recently saw your edition on the "synonymous species" area of the Arthropleura article, with the A. moyseyi species being reclassified has valid. In my initial edition to the page I based its invalidity on ANDERSON et. al. 1997 "Exceptionally preserved fossils from Bickershaw, Lancashire UK (Upper Carboniferous, Westphalian A (Langsettian))" (since I could not access the original papers the authors cite). On your edition you cite Spielmann 2010, an article I was not able to found. Could you provide me with the said article or if not possible its name and/or place where you found it cited. Thanks. User:Dinozaur X (talk) 12:08, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

The article is called Euramerican Late Pennsylvanian/Early Permian arthropleurid/tetrapod associations – implications for the habitat and paleobiology of the largest terrestrial arthropod. You can download it for free at ResearchGate.net and the page where it discusses A. moyseyi is page 64. Nezahaulcoyotl (talk) 20:54, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm already aware of that article, but it seems that you mistook the main author of the article (Schneider) for Spielmann, which lead me to the initial confusion when I saw it cited on the edition area. Thanks for answering nonetheless. After a quick revise and with the help of CTRL+F, it looks like the species is only referred 3 times in the article. The first and second appearances, where it is dubbed "smallest true Arthropleura", do not present, to my understanding of the text, new information regarding the status of the species, being only comparisons of the A. moyseyi specimen, known to certainly belong to the genus Arthropleura, with minute arthropleurid specimens of uncertain classification i.e. Montceau-les-Mines specimens. The third one is a brief appearance in an enumeration of the subjects of study by earlier authors. Due to this, I think it would be more reasonable to synonymize it with A. armata, as presented in ANDERSON et. al. (the closest thing I have to the original synonymization by Hahn et al. (1986)). User:Dinozaur X (talk) 19:45, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

July 2022

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Please stop adding Original Research and spurious claims to various articles on the encyclopedia. Magnet school is clearly defined and these schools obviously meet the criteria. A random website you found that is in no way official, and has no emblem of NYC or its DOE or any standing on its own About Us page, is not the determinant factor in the definition. JesseRafe (talk) 16:44, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, the website in question's phone number refers you to the secretary of Todd Levitt, the director of the Magnet Schools Assistance Program as stated on this government website: https://www2.ed.gov/programs/magnet/2010/ny.html. Nezahaulcoyotl (talk) 20:36, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

And what does that have to do with anything? This is about the meaning of words, not some random website with a phone number on it. Don't delete the links again and don't spam this website any further. Good day. JesseRafe (talk) 14:21, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

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

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button 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. Mr Eat (talk) 03:59, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Animal

Hi, many thanks for your additions. If you look at the section, you will see that I moved, edited, and cited the claim, which remains in the article. We therefore do not need it in there a second time! Interesting as the claim is, it only needs to be in the article once. I hope this is satisfactory for you.

By the way, if I had simply deleted it initially, your second insertion against consensus would have constituted editwarring --- the proper response would have been to start a talk page discussion to reach consensus; but that's not the situation here. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 03:40, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Nezahaulcoyotl, I'm sorry but your recent edits to Animal are bordering on the disruptive - I considered giving you a formal warning, but have persuaded myself for the moment that you probably have good intentions. All the same (whatever you are intending), you are right now causing trouble on the article - your edits have been modified or reverted by at least three other editors. It is not acceptable to keep on making changes that break structures, remove helpful information, fail to follow the article's citation format, and lack edit comments. Please could you make sure that you explain what you are trying to do, and develop the skill to do it - it might be best to practice in your Sandbox rather than on live articles. I have for example no idea why you might have wished to destroy the image gallery: normally such a radical deletion would be discussed on the talk page to reach consensus first: I can assure you that you do not have consensus for that - the images are plainly useful and relevant, and their removal is at best unwelcome, a careless mistake; and at worst, well, something much worse than that, so please take more care. Many thanks for your co-operation. Chiswick Chap (talk) 04:11, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I was using a mobile device and had to copy-and-paste the reference brackets onto the page as the feature that automatically inserts these brackets doesn't appear to be available on mobile devices. While I was pasting the brackets, I accidentally deleted some of the insertions which provided the framing for the images in question, causing the page to become unable to display the images properly. Nezahaulcoyotl (talk) 05:08, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:23, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

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) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Your sources don't support your edits

I'm concerned by your edits. I saw your edit to Solutrean hypothesis and found that the source you cited didn't support the text that you added. So I took a look at other edits in your contribution history. Your edit to Jack Owen Spillman had the same problem, as did your edit to Plague doctor costume (the source does not say Jacobi's was the earliest reference).

This is a serious matter. We cite sources in our articles so that readers can verify that the information is supported by a reliable authority. You should only add content that is explicitly supported by a reliable source. In your future edits, please make sure that the sources you cite actually support the text that you add. Schazjmd (talk) 15:00, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

My apologies about the Solutrean hypothesis and plague doctor costume edits. For the plague doctor costume page, I have now added that Jacobi's works were an early reference to plague masks rather than the earliest reference. However, I am a little confused about your critique of my edits about Jack Owen Spillman. Page 445 of Sex-Related Homicide and Death Investigation: Practical and Clinical Perspectives states that "Spillman fancied himself a werewolf". Nezahaulcoyotl (talk) 02:26, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

You're right about Spillman.[1] Interesting that searching the book doesn't find partial hits (I searched for "wolf"). However, there is a big difference between "wolf" and "werewolf" ― since the source said "werewolf", why did you write "wolf" in the article? Schazjmd (talk) 14:31, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

I changed it to werewolf. Nezahaulcoyotl (talk) 21:35, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

I saw that. Why did you write "wolf" in the original edit? Schazjmd (talk) 21:36, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Misrepresenting sources again

I saw that your edits to Sovereign citizen movement were reverted because, once again, you misrepresented your source. Please consider this a final warning: if you make any more article edits that are not explicitly supported by the sources you cite, I will request that administrators evaluate your suitability to edit Wikipedia articles. If you cannot accurately summarize what reliable sources say, don't make the edit. Schazjmd (talk) 13:24, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

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) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

December 2023

Please refrain from using talk pages for general discussion of this or other topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See the talk page guidelines for more information. Thank you. Acroterion (talk) 03:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

So you don't feel discussing the theory that Adam Lanza was inspired by Travis the chimpanzee is appropriate for the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting Conspiracy Theories article? Nezahaulcoyotl (talk) 05:53, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

You need reliably published secondary sources

for edits such as you made at Giant human skeletons. Doug Weller talk 20:31, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, could you explain why the section I included about the 1984 study published in the Nevada Historical Society Quarterly was appropriate for Wikipedia but the section about the 2024 study published in the International Journal of Osteoarchaeology is not?Nezahaulcoyotl (talk) 21:38, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't have time last night. The bit after the source wasn't in the source, so it was original research. I added a bit from the end of the conclusion about needing more evaluation and also the height range in cm, if you have the time can you add the convert template(not sure where to find it}.. Anyway, it's back, just edited. Doug Weller talk 10:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Contentious topics alert for the topic area Covid, broadly construed

You have recently edited a page related to COVID-19, broadly construed, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Doug Weller talk 12:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Star jelly and unreliable source, you also added sources without verifying them

subversive Element is clearly WP:Fringe and useless. You added sources from there which we expect you to have checked yourself. Did you? Doug Weller talk 12:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Can we keep the 1652, 1718 and 1803 sightings? The 1652 sighting occurs in the Annals of Philosophy New Series Volume 12. The 1718 sighting occurs in the Edinburgh Philosophical Journal Volume 1. The 1803 sighting occurs in JP Greg's A Catalogue of Meteorites and Fireballs, from AD 2 to AD 1860. Nezahaulcoyotl (talk) 00:52, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Nezahaulcoyotl You've actually read the sources? Doug Weller talk 08:11, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes Nezahaulcoyotl (talk) 10:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I can't find the Annals of Philosophy to read it. Greg seems dubious ,1718 journal is ok. Doug Weller talk 10:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Here is the Annals of Philosophy: https://backend.710302.xyz/https/upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/46/Annals_of_Philosophy_%28IA_annalsofphilosop12lond%29.pdf Nezahaulcoyotl (talk) 16:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I only find jelly in connection with a bullock's neck. Doug Weller talk 08:41, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Under 1652 it says, "A viscous mass, after a luminous meteor, between

Sienna and Rome." Nezahaulcoyotl (talk) 10:41, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I was also wondering, why did you remove the edits about the 1846 sighting? Nezahaulcoyotl (talk) 11:29, 13 September 2024 (UTC)