User talk:Patternbuffered

Welcome!

Hello, Patternbuffered! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages.

Getting Started

• Introduction • Contributing to Wikipedia • Your first article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset
• How to: edit a page • upload an image

Getting Help

• Get help at the Teahouse
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Where to ask questions
• Department directory
• Request administrator attention

Policies and Guidelines

• Neutral point of view • Verifiability • No original research
• Reliable sources • Citing sources • Content guidelines
• What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons

---

• Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule
• Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy
• External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sockpuppetry
• Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community

• Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program
• Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette
• No personal attacks • Resolving disputes
• Build consensus • Village pump
• Discord server • IRC channels • Mailing lists
• The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper)

Things to do

• Task Center • Be bold in editing
• Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles
• Join a WikiProject • Translating articles
• Cleaning up: General • Copy editing • Vandalism

Miscellaneous

• Categories • Disambiguation • Stubs
• User pages • Talk pages
• Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 17:25, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Broken Link

While reverting several of my edits to Zizians you posted a broken link in the edit summary. Where did you mean to link to? Loki (talk) 21:39, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Apologies, I just undid my reverts because of that. I can reply to you on the article Talk page, but it was this:

Talk:Zizians#c-Patternbuffered-20250304110000-PARAKANYAA-20250304064500

I think it's pointless to keep rewriting the article until we come to some consensus on WP:BLPCRIME. (I do think your edits were in good faith.) Patternbuffered (talk) 21:43, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Ah, okay. I'll respond there but here's a quick summary of what I plan to say:

The people in question are unambiguously not public figures, even Ziz herself (who is the only one where this is IMO even a question). Having your name in the paper is not by itself enough to make you a public figure or WP:BLPCRIME would never apply. While it's possible to be an involuntary public figure, that's more for cases like John Wayne Gacy who are genuinely known to the public as a result of what they did. These people aren't anywhere near that. Loki (talk) 21:50, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Fair enough! I'll respond there, thanks. Patternbuffered (talk) 21:54, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Talk page reversions

While you are allowed to post on the Talk Page of Users, and often you need to, it is generally discouraged to remove content from a User's Talk Page, even if you posted the content in the first place. If the User feels that they understood what was posted, they may either leave the post there, or remove it. It is generally their choice. The only time you're allowed to remove content is when there is Vandalism, Violation of BLP, etc. Thanks. Pibx (talk) 06:19, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

This IP user undid his edit within one minute. I'm not leaving a vandalism warning on a user's talk page that I put there in error. Is there a reason you restored it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_awards_and_nominations_received_by_Tomorrow_X_Together&diff=prev&oldid=1292984247 Patternbuffered (talk) 06:43, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for claryfying. No there wasn't a reason. Only thought about a User removing content on another User's Talk Page. Thanks again for saying why you did that. Pibx (talk) 06:45, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

OK thanks, no worries. I just removed it again now, put reason in edit. Patternbuffered (talk) 06:55, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks again. Pibx (talk) 06:55, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, 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 an expanded level of powers and discretion 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 practices;
• 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 have an account age of 30 days, and you are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any 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. — Newslinger talk 18:00, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict

Hi, which page, please? I've looked through my history and can't find it. I'm a stickler for WP:NPOV in general, and certainly wouldn't need an alert for this topic in particular. Patternbuffered (talk) 06:03, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Patternbuffered, your edits which are now archived at User talk:Theofunny/Archive 1 § Views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the Gaza war, including Special:Diff/1301532384 and Special:Diff/1302034717, are within the Arab–Israeli conflict contentious topic (WP:CT/A-I). Please remember that, due to the extended confirmed restriction in this topic area, the only edits you are able to make within this topic area are edit requests on article talk pages (i.e. the "Talk:" namespace, which does not include "User talk:" or other talk namespaces) until your account is extended confirmed. Your edits on User talk:Theofunny about the Arab–Israeli conflict (and the revert that you said you would do) are not allowed per this restriction, as your account is not yet extended confirmed. — Newslinger talk 14:04, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Appreciate the response. To clarify - and I'm fine with response, I don't think I took the subject matter itself into consideration at the time, I will going forward, this is more of a technical question - under 4) b. wouldn't my edits qualify for the userspace exception? Also, would you be able to answer the question I posed here, or should I ping the user to remind them? Or give them more time to respond? Thanks. Patternbuffered (talk) 15:14, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

The userspace exception is intended to cover discussions like our current conversation, so that you are not in violation of the extended confirmed restriction by discussing the contentious topic procedures. You raise a good point about the phrasing of the exception, so I am filing an amendment request to ask the Arbitration Committee to clarify this phrasing. I've mentioned this discussion in the request, so I am posting a separate notice about the request on this page (as required by the filing procedure).

As for your question to Little Professor, I don't recommend continuing that discussion, as I did decline your vandalism report because the reported edits were part of a content dispute, which is not considered vandalism. You are free to remove or archive that warning or section from this page, if you would like to do so. — Newslinger talk 00:57, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

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. — Newslinger talk 18:00, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

August 2025

Thank you for making a report at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, it appears that the editor you reported may not have engaged in vandalism, or the user was not sufficiently or appropriately warned. Please note there is a difference between vandalism and unhelpful or misguided edits made in good faith. If the user continues to vandalise after a recent final warning, please re-report them. Thank you. Little Professor (talk) 18:17, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, can you explain what I should have done differently re: "may not have engaged in vandalism, or the user was not sufficiently or appropriately warned" and "If the user continues to vandalise after a recent final warning, please re-report them"? They made 3 disruptive edits earlier today before I issued a final warning today and 3 disruptive edits after before I reported to WP:AIV. Prior to today I issued 2 other warnings on their talk page (right above where you put yours) and prior to those multiple edit summaries after reverts where I explained the reason for the revert and pointed to relevant WP:PG. They have either left no summaries after their edits/reverts or just insults. So what could I do better? What should I have posted differently than this to WP:AIV? I assume someone actually looked at the user's contribs and talk page before coming to the conclusion this was an edit war? Patternbuffered (talk) 19:33, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the 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; read about 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Little Professor (talk) 18:21, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Notification of amendment request for Palestine-Israel articles 4

You are involved in a recently filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Amendment request: Palestine-Israel articles 4 and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.

Thanks, — Newslinger talk 01:04, 25 August 2025 (UTC)