User talk:SamWilson989

Archive

Welcome to my talk page. If you'd like to leave me a message, click here to start a new section at the bottom. Please note that I may sometimes manually archive discussions I believe are now inactive. Thanks, SamWilson989.

'King of England' is already in article title -- descriptive enough. Plz see WP:SDNOTDEF. – S. Rich (talk) 15:00, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are right - thanks for correcting me SamWilson989 (talk) 12:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

TonyBallioni (talk) 14:27, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, that's very helpful. SamWilson989 (talk) 14:28, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SamWilson989, I wanted to say that the change that I made in that list was because my dog Bolinhas died 3 days ago and as I saw the records she was older then some of them in that list, I was trying to put her in that list because she lived the best time of her life and also me and my family really loved her, I wanted to have something to remember me and my family of her and to leave the mark she let on us in some way in this site, that way I made that change, the only proof I have that she was that old is old pics of her with my family. So if you could and if it was possible for you to put it how it was before I would appreciate it. Thanks for your time KanikLyna :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by KanikLyna (talk • contribs) 18:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @KanikLyna. I'm sorry to hear about your dog. I've always had dogs and it must be awful to lose Bolinhas. Wikipedia has policies that govern what can be added to the site. One of those policies is that information that is added must be verifiable by independent sources. As you describe yourself, it seems unlikely such sources exist for Bolinhas. I am unlikely to go back to that article in the future and so although I have no plans to get involved in specific edits, I can't promise other users won't revert your addition of Bolinhas and unfortunately it's a losing battle for you without anything to verify your claim. I wish you all the best x SamWilson989 (talk) 20:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

The edits made to the Craig Federighi page were because if you were to review the citations these are all opinion pieces. Wikipedia is not supposed to be of opinions - that would mean that it was not written in a neutral tense. None of these sources document any type of research on whether Apple has gone down in security or the latter, they're so popular today they have remained the same but people are discussing it more therefore security issues are becoming more accessible. Furthermore, there is no indication in any of these articles that they have actually looked at previous breaches or used the older software and made sure that it was secure or didn't have security issues that were not fixed before stating he "oversaw a marked decline in the quality and security of Apple's software products" Having 10 citations doesn't mean the citations are of quality in nature. It's important that Wikipedia remains true to factual evidence based citations.

CeeAreJay88 (talk) 01:06, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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) 01:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]