User talk:Parqs

Parqs, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Parqs! 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 Jtmorgan (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

May 2021

Hello, I'm Citrivescence. I noticed that you recently removed content from Patti Harrison without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. The information you removed was substantiated and cited using a reliable source. Citrivescence (talk) 02:29, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's not warranted or acceptable for you to be rude or dismissive because you disagree with me, period. I re-read the source and see that the phrasing was incorrect. If you feel that something is incorrect as you did, please be bold and simply make the proper edit. As your fellow editor, you need to treat me respectfully or do not leave me any further messages. --Citrivescence (talk) 22:39, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Using a tag to notify someone of something is not disrespectful, presumptive, or patronizing and I stand by that. I strongly recommend you read Wikipedia:Assume good faith so you can contribute to building a positive and respectful editing community. --Citrivescence (talk) 17:56, 14 May 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) 01:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Erling Haaland page

You are making a mess of his career stats section adding goals during games and not filling out and adding the correct figures to all the columns. He should have played 26 games in all competitions and scored 31 goals. you edited the page wrong. can you fix the totals ? 31.200.147.234 (talk) 16:03, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Haaland has played 26 games not 25 you forgot to change that ?. why don't you wait you the games are finished before adding the info. this is how mistakes are made 31.200.147.234 (talk) 16:06, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have not made a mess of the stats, I've been in the process of fixing the mess others have made. Please learn some patience. The stats table is correct now, please stop leaving multiple messages. parqs (talk) 16:10, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an 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.

Additionally you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

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.

Selfstudier (talk) 18:19, 10 October 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) 00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

“Transgender”

Concerns voiced by sockpuppet Glass Snow

@Parqs Hello, in the interest of deterring an edit war I am reaching out to see what reasons you so vehemently oppose describing Schafer as “transgender” in the lead. It quite literally states in the lead that the individual gained notoriety for their trans activism (opposition to HB2), as well as portraying a trans character in a popular television show. This seems to be a very notable aspect of this individual and the lead does not otherwise state anywhere that the individual is transgender. Unless there is some Wikipedia policy that I am unaware of, I see no reason why we on Wikipedia must make some concerted effort to conceal such a basic fact from the lead and/or lead sentence. How other editors have chosen to write other articles neither informs nor dictates how Schafer’s is written, only codified Wikipedia policy and guidelines do. Glass Snow (talk) 07:00, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of my edits on the article have opposed the subject as being described as "transgender" in the lead. As stated, it is not appropriate to describe an actor as a "transgender actor". As you feel so strongly about describing the subject as being transgender in the lead, I previously suggested that you go ahead and do so in an appropriate manner. parqs (talk) 07:44, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

“Transgender American actor” imparts to the reader exactly what the individual is: an actor that is transgender. There is no syntactical conflict occurring there. Regardless if you don’t like how it is phrased, why don’t you suggest better phrasing or boldly edit yourself, instead of non-constructively reverting it over and over? What you are doing is edit warring behavior and teetering on WP:3RR. Glass Snow (talk) 07:55, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's no different than having a lead that says "Neil Patrick Harris is a gay American actor". If you can't understand why that's not an appropriate way to begin a biographical article I'm not sure what more I can tell you. It's clear you're not particularly interested in improving the lead to support your desire of including the fact she is transgender outside of this narrow approach you've latched onto and are interested in prevailing in against me and other editors.

Also, I did not violate the 3RR rule, which states that a 4th revert within a 24 hour period or a 4th revert just outside of the 24 hour period constitutes an edit war violation. You, however, have made a 4th revert just outside of the 24 hour period. I'll be submitting a notice to the admins and will update your talk page with a notification once I have done so. parqs (talk) 08:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your comparison is one of apples to oranges. Being gay does not obfuscate whether or not the subject is male or female. Furthermore, you can definitely mention that a person is gay in their lead, even lead sentence, if it is notable and particularly if it is relevant to their notoriety, someone like Harvey Milk for example. So your comparison does not hold water on several levels. (Personal attack removed) Glass Snow (talk) 13:05, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since when do we start articles with "Morgan Freeman is a male American actor"? (Personal attack removed) parqs (talk) 17:18, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024

~~You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.~~
You had been blocked from editing to prevent further edit warring, but the other user Glass Snow turned out to be a block-evading sockpuppet of BUZZLIGHTYEAR99 / Durchbruchmüller. Details can be found at Special:Permalink/1249126526. Your reverts were allowed per WP:3RRNO #3 ("Reverting actions performed by banned users in violation of a ban, and sockpuppets or meatpuppets of banned or blocked users").

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:56, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Contentious topics

You have recently made edits related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them. This is a standard message to inform you that gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics.

You have recently made edits related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. This is a standard message to inform you that articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics.

Further edit warring in either of these two topic areas may lead to a topic ban or a longer block from editing. I acknowledge that WP:BLPRESTORE is on your side in this conflict and have restored your revision, but it didn't justify edit warring in this specific case (#7 of WP:3RRNO doesn't really apply and wasn't claimed either).

~ ToBeFree (talk) 09:18, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Parqs, Glass Snow turns out to be a sockpuppet (see the updated block notice above). I'll re-block your account for 1 second (WP:AMENDLOG) to note in the block log that your previous block was unneeded. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:33, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done: [1]. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can't say I'm surprised. I appreciate the follow up. parqs (talk) 16:26, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you see them returning, please let me (or WP:SPI and optionally me) know. I'm afraid it won't be that easy/obvious but who knows. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]