For old talk please see:

• User talk:SVTCobra/Archive 1
• User talk:SVTCobra/Archive 2

A file that you uploaded or altered,File:H3h3Productions logo.jpg, has been listed atWikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see thediscussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.Throast (talk)21:42, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wow,Throast! And thenyou uploadedFile:H3h3productions logo new.png. That makes a lot of sense. What was this song and dance about? --SVTCobra10:16, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleStephen Savage (director), to which you havesignificantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should bedeleted.

The discussion will take place atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Savage (director) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visitthe configuration page. Delivered bySDZeroBot (talk)01:03, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SVTCobra: Please restore my edit of this article. 2 reasons - If you followed the article itself, all the way to the bottom (Media coverage and public interest), you would have seen this observation noted and referenced, including from theNew York Times andThe Guardian. If you followed the link you would have found this event also included, complete with 4 references including MSN andGood Morning America. As you may know, in Wikipedia, the opening lead is intended to providea synopsis of the article which is to follow and references are therefore not required (Forgive me for not citing the relevant policy, but believe me, it's true; I've been here a while). You have too: you should know. Bottom line: I would not have added the point without having first been aware of those other facts. It was not a frivolous edit. It was intended to educate. OK?Verne Equinox (talk)01:08, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi@Verne Equinox:. I do follow the article and I was fully aware of the "missing white woman syndrome" and also, yes, major things from the body of the article do belong in the lede/lead paragraph. That said, your statement was much more declarative than what was contained below. I think I have brought back the essence of your edit back into the lede withthis edit. Cheers, --SVTCobra01:36, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well,@Verne Equinox:, I, too, was reverted. So I started asection on the talk page. Cheers, --SVTCobra03:16, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SVTCobra: - Thanks. I will reply, and restore your revision, but did you realize there has been extensive discussion about this for weeks?— Precedingunsigned comment added byVerne Equinox (talk •contribs)09:34, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I kinda glanced at it, but it was about whether to include it at all and seems to have been settled on "yes" ... So this is more specifically about the lede. --SVTCobra23:38, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:00, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anora Group, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed asStart-Class, which is recorded on itstalk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as theydevelop over time. You may like to take a look at thegrading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can nowcreate articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work toArticles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at thehelp desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option tocreate articles yourself without posting a request toArticles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please considerleaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Devonian Wombat (talk)01:07, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I thank you for making the change re Philharmonic. The orchestra in Puerto Rico was very particular about making sure they were referred to as Philharmonic not Symphony, hence my attempt at editing. I take your advice about conflict of interest and have only made a small number of edits where I felt that I had been omitted unintentionally. Keep well and have a good Christmas/Holiday time. Mike— Precedingunsigned comment added byMikedixonmusic (talk •contribs)21:49, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikedixonmusic:. You are welcome and thanks for understanding. These situations come up more often than you might expect. I hope they will be able to get the pageant underway as soon as possible, but I could imagine worse places than Puerto Rico to be for the holidays. Merry Christmas to you, too. Cheers, --SVTCobra22:04, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I strongly believe the sources are unreliable. First source is just showing amount of titles, the second source is a TNA Profile page(every wrestler who worked there has one), the third source is a WWE Profile page(again every wrestler who worked for this company has one), fourth source is showing he has been released from WWE, 5th source is a really bad ranking of professional wrestlers(even putting Eddie Gurrero(1 time World Champion) who i like above Triple H(14 time World Champion). I am a fan of Jeff Hardy and he and his brother is definitely one of the greatest tag teams in history but he just hasn't done enough to be considered one of the greatest wrestlers of all time. He won the WWE title only once(most prestigious in all off wrestling) and has never even main evented Wrestlemania.(most presitigious Wrestling event). Jeff also hardly had any top tier Wrestlemania matches.— Precedingunsigned comment added byChami46 (talk •contribs)15:33, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You should have posted this toTalk:Jeff Hardy so more editors could see it. But I also noticed in your other edits that you thought something calledMidrange Vancouver was a reliable source even though they have no expertise in professional wrestling. But I will also note, that Jeff Hardy was on Midrange's list. Finally, it's not whether every WWE wrestler has a profile, it's about what it says. --SVTCobra17:53, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I simply lost interest in editing Wiki pages today. And as for Jeff Hardy he didn't have a single memorable marquee Wrestlemania match(most presitigious Wrestling event) as a singles competitor. And some people call him one of the greatest of all time? I'm done with trying to get a point across.— Precedingunsigned comment added byChami46 (talk •contribs)19:40, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What I am hearing from you, is you want to dooriginal research instead of usingreliable sources. In any event, if you ever want to make your point again, it belongs onTalk:Jeff Hardy, not here. Cheers, --SVTCobra20:28, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So all those sources are unreliable, but midrange isn't? Or is it because you agree with midrange and not the other sources so they are "unreliable". I hate to break it to you but midrange isn't a quality source either, but you seem to have a tendency to use either poor sources or none at all as you did atJean Alesi --TylerBurden (talk)05:58, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking to me or Chaim? --SVTCobra06:19, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To Chami46. --TylerBurden (talk)06:20, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't think my talk page is the best place to do so. Y'all should keep your wrestling talk on the articles. It doesn't belong here. I gave Chaim a break as a novice, but why are you here, Tyler? --SVTCobra06:34, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just though I'd chime in, I've had issues with this editor as well. I'm not involved in the wrestling articles other than reverting some of their edits yesterday. --TylerBurden (talk)07:18, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

God Jul! Men jeg kan forsvare mig selv! --SVTCobra07:43, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. God Jul och gott nytt år! --TylerBurden (talk)07:47, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I only came onto it viathis edit, but you must have seen that I was aware of yourWP:AN3 report. --SVTCobra08:02, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for late response, but to solve the mystery yes I did see that. Also your car is awesome. --TylerBurden (talk)02:52, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I do love the car. Sadly, I might have to sell her. Are you interested? She has really low miles. --SVTCobra02:58, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would be but I don't think I got the budget for it at the moment. I hope you get to keep her, would be a shame to part ways with such a beauty. --TylerBurden (talk)03:08, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Understandable. And I don't know what I'd do after. I will probably have to change my wiki-identity. She's aTerminator. --SVTCobra03:19, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I want to thank you for dealing with the baseless complaint against me for COI and the accusations that I am the puppet master of an army of puppets. These accusations are baseless and I must admit that I am a bit overwhelmed by all of the bureaucracy here at Wikipedia. Do I have any recourse against the user who is making all of these accusations against me in an attempt to silence me?--Underthemayofan (talk)05:56, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

From my admittedly basic understanding, I believe this user's actions are a pretty bad violation ofWP:AGF.--Underthemayofan (talk)06:03, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but the constant questioning of edits, etc. and forming a consensus is basically what has led Wikipedia to become so trusted. It has led to unfortunate edit wars and personal conflicts. There are years of drama behind the scenes ... I say behind the scenes even though most of it is out in the open, once you open the Pandora's box of things that are not in the article space. I am not in the habit of reporting lack of AGF for reports to COIN. --SVTCobra06:12, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I always see you in COIN threads so I thought you'd be the correct person to ask. As you can see in the RP2006 thread neither him nor Sgerbic are willing to disclose their COI. In the case of Rp2006 I have proof he has a COI but sharing that on-wiki would constitute outing. Is there some email I can contact with the information?Santacruz⁂Please ping me!11:51, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes,@A. C. Santacruz: per the instructions at the top ofWP:COIN you can email paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org, though I don't know exactly who is on that mailing list, or any individualfunctionary. The only time I ever emailed was in theLuckin_Coffee case. I chose to email User:Drmies but only because they had already issued blocks in the case so I knew they were familiar. And as you probably recall, Drmies asked me to forward a copy toArbCom for them to "file away". Mailing to functionaries-en@lists.wikimedia.org would get the information to all functionaries which to me seems like overkill. In any event, you have quite a few options, but it should not just be an administrator, they should be listed on that functionaries page. Maybe pick someone who is actively editing and not away for New Years. Cheers, --SVTCobra13:12, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick reply, much appreciated. Enjoy your new year's :).Santacruz⁂Please ping me!13:13, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@A. C. Santacruz: Snuish just posted in theWikiIslam thread. It looks like they used paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org. Happy New Year! --SVTCobra13:17, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

One things keeps bugging me.c:File:2020.02.03-Ross.Edgely.PhD.Home-2174.jpg has an EXIF creation and digitizing date of 07:57, 31 January 2020 and a camera model (Canon EOS 5D Mark IV) so that isn't just a photoshop date.Rossedgley139 uploaded it with the description "Ross Edgley training for his 1,780-mile swim around Great Britain". I thought he did that in 2018? (either he did it again, it's a photo of a photo or the EXIF is falsified, but I don't know which) —Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me)13:29, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexis Jazz: Yes, that is an unusual mistake to make. And while it is the full image, at 192KB, it is obviously not the full resolution that a 5D camera would produce. I guess we will never know unless the user comes back to defend the image. --SVTCobra07:28, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw it, but you didn't put it right at the bottom of the page.Deb (talk)16:33, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Deb: I used "new section" when I posted. This is a new phenomenon for me. I can't see what I posted. Thanks for replying. --SVTCobra16:37, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you use Page History and click on the diff, you'll see where you put it. I'm not sure if there's a glitch.Deb (talk)16:46, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I can see the diffs. But my edits are not visible otherwise (and I think the same is true for at least one other editor's post). Very strange glitch. Can you see them without going into diffs and edit history? Cheers, --SVTCobra16:54, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Deb: There was an open {{ that messed with your talk page. I think I removed it, but please check if I edited your talk page too much. Cheers and sorry to be such a bother. --SVTCobra17:02, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see what you mean now. I think that problem was introduced by a recent and persistent correspondent who didn't understand how to format their message! :-)Deb (talk)22:06, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently editedGrant Kereama, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageGold FM.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk)05:57, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Thank you, DPL bot. --SVTCobra02:32, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for closing that. Now that I'm done with exams I'll have more time to lend you a hand over at COIN, I know how busy you are there. Enjoy the rest of the week, will you ^u^A. C. Santacruz ⁂Please ping me!14:27, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Darn, just realized that the last sentence sounds like I'm telling you to F off. Not my intention! Just wishing you a good week.A. C. Santacruz ⁂Please ping me!15:00, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@A. C. Santacruz: Thanks and don't worry, I didn't take it the wrong way. Hope you did well on your exams. Cheers, --SVTCobra16:33, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Excellent looking out atGrant Kereama, bringing an article up to date and doing cleanup in a situation (BLP subject editing their own article) where most people tend towards kneejerk opposition to changes.jp×g07:09, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@JPxG: Thanks, but it was light work compared toKeven McDonald from a couple of years go (same situation: BLP subject editing their own article and encountered on COIN). Cheers, --SVTCobra09:19, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SVTCobra:: All the changes madeRyan Kavanaugh have reliable sources. Without verification, you just undid updates. On the other end, no discussion is open onTalk:Ryan Kavanaugh related to this edit.Digiuserca (talk)11:45, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't explain the massive block of changes and citations in the ledeMOS:LEDE. Most of this stuff has already been discussed at the talk page. But, like I said, I haven't looked at all of it. --SVTCobra13:10, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Digiuserca: if you readTalk:Ryan Kavanaugh you will see thatdiscretionary sanctions are in place for this article. In short, it means you need to build consensus on the talk page before major changes. I don't have time to elaborate. --SVTCobra13:18, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Digiuserca: Actually, I've spent some time breaking downboth of your recent edits. There's been a section dedicated to your edits since January 31, seeTalk:Ryan Kavanaugh#Additions by Digiuserca. In my opinion, both of your major additions are flawed through and through as I explain at the talk page. Please take a look.Throast (talk |contribs)18:00, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to start by saying thank you for all of your help and I appreciate the time you spent. Moving forward would it be ok if I checked with you before publishing anything? I just want to be transparent as possible. I do understand you are busy on here and I am open to any suggestions. I am just really excited to get back into it and wanted to thank you. Have a wonderful day!Film_Fanatical10069^t@lk16:02, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. And yes, you may. I don't know if you plan to make articles for very small films, but if you do, do make sure your sources meetreliable sources guidelines. Cheers, --SVTCobra16:11, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Andnotability, too, of course. --SVTCobra16:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. For transparency, here is my game plan over the next coming months. I am no rush to create new articles about current films or people. I still have a lot to learn and am going to be overly cautious.

1. I plan on practicing for a while in the sandbox. Possibly even creating some mock articles just for practice, to delete later. Possibly a mockDays of Thunder article. Only to practice, then delete.

2. Then focusing on adding to aDon Simpson article I was going to help with before I ran into "issues".

3. Then I will focus on general articles of films or people ofalready created articles.

4. (After many months) At this point, I might create articles ofdeceased people orfilms 30 years or older. This would be a ways down the road and I would of course touch bases before publishing.

This would all be done before even considering creating something current.Film_Fanatical10069^t@lk23:36, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is now a sleeper account. I agree that it'll be tough for the sockmaster to ever use it for paid editing again, but there's little doubt in my mind that it's one of many accounts they're using or have in reserve. The more I read online about paid editing, the more obvious this case seems to me.Fred Zepelin (talk)17:27, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Goodness, gracious! The 30 June edit was so evident of that. Fred, please relax.SVTCobra02:40, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently editedViktor Axelsen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageAFP.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk)09:19, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HiSVTCobra! The thread you created at theWikipedia:Teahouse,Darius Bowie, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can stillread the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, pleasecreate a new thread. See also thehelp page about the archival process.The archival was done byLowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered byMuninnbot, bothautomated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing{{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page).Muninnbot (talk)19:02, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey you’re the only person that’s taking this serious and actually giving me a chance , how do I got about making this happen ? I am able to find interesting topics. Like a I created La Mancha Negra , which is a wiki Page (look it up) but I needed help to create it. Could you help me ? Plazmid 21:59, 28 July 2022 (UTC)— Precedingunsigned comment added byPlazmid (talk •contribs)

An automated process has detected that when you recently editedJodie Fisher, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageFortune.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk)06:02, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:28, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article that been involved with (h3h3Productions) has content that is proposed to be removed and moved to another article (Ethan Klein). If you are interested, please visitthe discussion. Thank you.Thats Just Great (talk)19:53, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:10, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]