Jump to content

User talk:HurricaneTracker495: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 246: Line 246:
:{{ping|Destroyeraa}} Please give it a [[WP: CHANCE]]. I request you wait 10 days so I can improve it. Please honor this. --[[User:HurricaneTracker495|Hurricane]] [[User talk: HurricaneTracker495|Tracker]] [[Special: Contributions/HurricaneTracker495|495]] 17:19, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
:{{ping|Destroyeraa}} Please give it a [[WP: CHANCE]]. I request you wait 10 days so I can improve it. Please honor this. --[[User:HurricaneTracker495|Hurricane]] [[User talk: HurricaneTracker495|Tracker]] [[Special: Contributions/HurricaneTracker495|495]] 17:19, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
::Sure. 10 days. '''~''' [[User:Destroyeraa|<span style="color:#00CCFF;">Destroyer</span>]][[User talk:Destroyeraa|🌀]][[Special:Contribs/Destroyeraa|🌀]] 18:29, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
::Sure. 10 days. '''~''' [[User:Destroyeraa|<span style="color:#00CCFF;">Destroyer</span>]][[User talk:Destroyeraa|🌀]][[Special:Contribs/Destroyeraa|🌀]] 18:29, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Destroyeraa}} Thanks and please help out with sourcing as well. --[[User:HurricaneTracker495|Hurricane]] [[User talk: HurricaneTracker495|Tracker]] [[Special: Contributions/HurricaneTracker495|495]] 18:30, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:30, 25 December 2020

Hello, welcome to my talk page!

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom, as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~

Attention: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page—my talk page—as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!

Happy Thanksgiving!

~ Destroyeraa🌀 has given you a Turkey! Turkeys promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a turkey, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy Thanksgiving!

Spread the goodness of turkey by adding {{subst:Thanksgiving Turkey}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Destroyeraa (talkcontribs) 02:20, November 26 2020 (UTC)

Adding this comment for sole purpose of allowing it to be archived. --Hurricane Tracker 495 22:17, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Invite! (fixed)

DO YOU WANT TO WRITE FOR THE HURRICANE HERALD?


Hello there, cyclone editor and WPTC member! I am an editor for the Hurricane Herald, the WikiProject's semi-regular newsletter documenting the events and progress over the months an issue covers. For every issue, we need at least two editors to write an opinion piece for the newsletter. Opinion pieces can be about the WikiProject, users, storms, and general stuff that related to tropical cyclones. Examples of past pieces include a first-person account of a new user's experience before and after joining the project, criticism or praise of the project, first-person accounts of surviving deadly hurricanes, and incentive to start a featured topic, and proposals for clarification or change of project guidelines. If you are interested in writing a piece for the HH, please contact the message deliverer below or on their talk page. Thank you for participating in WikiProject Tropical cyclones!

Hi HurricaneTracker495, consider giving your opinion about sockpuppetry within WPTC. Through the years, there is a lot of LTAs used to be on the WPTC, so I would like you to give your opinion on that! This is why I reserved the third opinion piece slot for that reason. SMB99thx my edits! 12:31, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SMB99thx: my opinion is that when experienced users do it, they lose there rights. When they become LTAs, lock them up. Also, the worst LTA is IPh95, due to his personal attacks(maybe UAK). HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 12:52, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Okay then, go ahead! :) SMB99thx my edits! 12:53, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@SMB99thx: what do you want me to write exactly? --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 15:21, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your *full* opinion. Try to take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Newsletter/Archive 43 to see what I mean by opinion piece. SMB99thx my edits! 15:25, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You can talk with Weatherman27 for help. SMB99thx my edits! 15:26, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@SMB99thx: my first part of statement malformed can you fix it? --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 15:32, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to sleep now, it's 11:43 PM (UTC+08:00, Bali time) SMB99thx my edits! 15:43, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I can help you fix the first part of the statement if SMB99thx hasn't already. What exactly is malformed that needs fixing? 🌀Weatherman27🏈 (Chat|Edits|sandbox) 16:31, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Weatherman27: below the line. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 16:32, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, the formatting should be fixed, does it look better now? 🌀Weatherman27🏈 (Chat|Edits|sandbox) 16:39, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks and I will finish my statement when I'm done with school a little after 19:00 UTC (2:00 PM UTC-5). --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 16:58, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, just remember that there's no rush to complete the article right away, we still have over a month until this edition of the newsletter is published, so you will have plenty of time to think and revise your opinion piece to get it how you want. otherwise, enjoy editing the newsletter! Cheers~ 🌀Weatherman27🏈 (Chat|Edits|sandbox) 17:04, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ok. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 12:40, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SMB99thx and HurricaneTracker495: IPhonehurricane95 (Jeffrey Gu) was the worst LTA to ever show up on WPTC. He even started the "UnderArmourKid" vandalism nonsense (complete with the 9/11 imagery). I don't know if Lightning Sabre (the person behind the newer "UAK" accounts) actually knows IPH95. But it's a possibility. They have coordinated their attacks in late 2014 and in the summer of 2016. It's best not to reveal all of the sensitive details. Some things are best left unmentioned in the public space. But it would be nice to provide an informative excerpt on the history of their activities. Personally, I probably know more about IPH95 than most other editors on WPTC, but everyone who was here back in 2014 knows him. We all got attacked by that nut. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 00:04, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, that opinion piece of yours probably needs to be revised. It gets unnecessarily harsh in a few areas. It should probably be edited by other senior editors as well. BTW, concerning CUs, maybe all of the new editors from the past 6 months or so should be vetted by CU. But it's not required, and CUs are unlikely to grant such a request without serious allegations of abuse. Only the most circumspect/problematic users would even be eligible for CU action. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 00:07, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to edit it if you wish. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 21:16, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
How did you know how to hide information, Casiotone Nation? Did you use an account before this? Please disclose. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 14:49, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why you replied in this section, but uh, I'm sorry? I didn't know source comments were a feature only used by Wikipedia's most elite. I just saw some flaws with the article and wanted to address them. I don't really understand all of the scrutiny. If you don't find anything wrong with my edits, I just ask for you to restore them. Casiotone Nation (talk) 15:04, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Darren-M: I did assume good faith, because if I wasn’t, I would jump to a more severe warning. That’s what a general note is. What is non constructive is whether or not it improves Wikipedia. This, really didn’t. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 15:59, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I’m avaliable in a few hours to talk on IRC. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 21:59, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
it wasn’t; multitude of reasons. I kind of feel like I have no choice or I will become like PythonSwarm. I may be on simple though. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:44, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
please leave off my talk page and leave it on the affected article. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 00:54, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn’t find any sources Destroyeraa, and honestly creating articles is hard I tried with Charley in Florida and I had to abandon it. Hurricane Tracker 495 19:14, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi HurricaneTracker495! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 18:46, Thursday, December 3, 2020 (UTC)

Your conduct at WP:AN

Hello, HurricaneTracker495,

You might have edited for a few months as an IP account but this current account is a little over a month old. It is inappropriate for you to be explaining policy on the Administrator's Noticeboard to admins and editors with years and, in some cases, decades worth of experience working on the project. You are a newbie.

This is a polite message on your talk page rather than a more public reprimand because I think if you continue with this precocious conduct, some admin with a shorter fuse than mine will probably slap you down. Even though you are inexperienced, feel free to offer your opinion but do not try to instruct more experienced editors and admins on how policy works. They have seen thousands of editors come and go and will be annoyed, not impressed, by your attempts to lecture them. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 18:03, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the advice. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 18:05, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In general, I think you assess your understanding of Wikipedia policies, guidelines, and procedures as stronger than it actually is. For example, you were wrong to suggest the use of CheckUser to "see if you really know him". That is emphatically not what CheckUser can do: CheckUser can determine whether two users were using the same or similar IP addresses and/or user agents, but cannot itself show why.
I strongly advise that you stick to content work and refrain from further anti-vandalism patrolling or other administrative areas, except !vote'ing in deletion discussions. I myself learned the hard way that patrolling when you do not have a firm understanding of policies, guidelines, and procedures leads to you giving inaccurate or even outright WP:BITEy advice.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:40, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like my advice has fallen on deaf ears, for you have continued attempting to patrol for vandalism. There's no particularly troublesome edits among those edits, but I would appreciate it if you would at least respond here. I just had a look at Wikipedia talk:Standard offer and reiterate my request that you stay out of administrative areas of Wikipedia.--Jasper Deng (talk) 02:30, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I heard, just clarfifying. However, I wouldn’t call antivandalism as “administrative area”, something I am supposed to be doing per my CVUA. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 03:00, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well I do, and I even specifically indicated that above. Definitions aside, I do not think you are ready for this. Like I said, I learned this the hard way; do not repeat my mistake. Communication with other users is key when they bring up concerns about your editing.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:07, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Give them a chance. They're learning through the CVUA. An honest over-confident mistake by a newbie isn't the best reason to exclude them from trying new things and doing what they enjoy on the project. Also, you mention "communication with other users is key when they bring up concerns about your editing". You did not ask any questions or really leave something to continue on to. Within the boundaries of WP:ENGAGE, HurricaneTracker did not need to respond and there's no need to force it by assuming your comments had "fallen on deaf ears". WP:BITE. If you believe there is an issue with their counter vandalism work in and of itself (evidence of which I do not see at the moment), mention it, other than the cap between your years and HurricaneTracker's months of experience. HurricaneTracker, I agree that you should most definitely work on your skills through the CVUA still, and feel free to ask me if you need any help interpreting polices. They can get very confusing sometimes. Best, 🎄🎄 Ed talk! 🎄🎄 08:29, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Given this editor's continued disruption I retract this message. 🎄🎄 Ed talk! 🎄🎄 20:42, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ed6767, I'm not sure I'm totally in alignment with you here - I think responding substantively to the comments raised by editors here would go a long way towards showing that they are keen to learn and develop. Whether that is formally required or not is clearly a different point, but not one that I think is super pertinent.
For what it's worth, I don't think that HurricaneTracker should totally refrain from anti-vandalism work - but I do think that they should refrain from involving themselves in all but the most clear-cut cases until they have developed their skills. Best, Darren-M talk 18:42, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have 3 possible definitions for that. (1) All but obvious vandalism, (2) all but obvious vandalism/disruptive editing or (3) all but obvious vandalism, disruptive editing, tests, unexplained content removal or BLP violations. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 18:49, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have no problems with HurricaneTracker495 reverting vandalism or disruptive editing, though I think, with all due respect, that he should refrain from participating in the most administrative areas (blocking, BLP, Sockpuppetry, etc.). ~ Destroyeraa🌀 18:55, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

definitely thank you Ed6767 for the nice words. I am definitely learning what to and what not to revert during CVUA. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 13:43, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw the WP:SO "guideline" proposal. I have never seen the standard offer work on any users, though some are trying. And sorry for the Easter Egg links. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 11:07, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Caution

Please take the time to read up on Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Your comments here and here indicate a profound misunderstanding of what notability is and how it works, along with a failure to read the page instructions in the first place and a frankly shocking lack of understanding on the second (that could also be very easily misconstrused as racist). These combined with the commentary in the "Re: Concerning views regarding discussions on talk pages" section above raise concerns that you don't understand how Wikipedia works in fundamental ways and your dismissive tone here and here to an attempted explanation of how Wikipedia works does not help that impression. Please take a step back, take a deep breath, have a nice cup of tea, and read and understand the rules, because if you continue to make comments like the "not notable" ones above it won't end well. - The Bushranger One ping only 06:47, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's just that if Wikipedia likes to publicize only semi or even non notable events, yet a major disaster like Hurricane Delta doesn't make ITN(granted, the initial damage estimate was $2 billion), it leads to a mixed review. Basically-if you go to a TV, do you here about these random recent deaths, or Delta? Probably Delta, especially in Mexico and Louisiana. (Where Delta was a cat 2). Sure the Ghana PM was all over Ghana but, we need to balence both sides. --Hurricane Tracker 495 23:10, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Focus on content creation

Hi HurricaneTracker495, and I hope you are well. Your recent behavior does not reflect well on the promises that you've made in the threads above and on your userpage (the semi-retirement). I strongly suggest you focus more on content creation or content work. Creating content is a good way to regain lost trust. However, skedaddling around ITN or other talk pages isn't a good way to regain lost trust, and can garner more annoyance towards you. For example, some of the comments you made on ITN blatantly shows you didn't read the instructions. Also, since you aren't so familiar yet with policy, I suggest you stop lecturing others about policy.

We are all here to build up an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a place to chat and discuss, it's a place to create content and improve content. One way to create content is to create drafts. If you find a topic missing from Wikipedia that isn't questionable on its notability, you can create a draft, and after you worked on it, submit it to AfC. Or, you may work on existing drafts and articles, such as the Draft:Late November snowstorm of 2020. The draft clearly needs more references, which is why I declined it.

Creating or improving content is a good way to gain more experience on Wikipedia. Thus, I suggest you focus more on that instead of making long and sometimes pointless discussions. Cheers, ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 19:05, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Warning icon Please stop your disruptive behavior. Do not use multiple IP addresses to disrupt Wikipedia or avoid scrutiny (such as this one), like you did at Talk:Hurricane Michael or Talk:Meteorological history of Hurricane Michael. Such attempts to avoid detection, circumvent policies or evade blocks or sanctions will not succeed. If you continue your deceptive behavior or continue to make disruptive edits (either intentionally or unintentionally), you may be blocked from editing. You really, really need to stop. HurricaneTracker495, you decided days ago to go on a week-long Wikibreak. Stick to it. You're just going to cause more problems on Wikipedia and for yourself if you continue trying to circumvent it. You are about to wear out the patience of the admins and other editors on this site. I suggest that you refrain from testing their patience any further. DO NOT do this again. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 14:01, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LightandDark2000, What has led you to make the allegation that HT and the IP you've mentioned are linked? Best, Darren-M talk 14:15, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Darren-M: The behavior, more specifically, their "reasoning", is a dead giveaway. Both the IP and HT495 are identical in behavior. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 14:17, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Darren-M: Please excuse my interruption. HT495 and the IP are clearly the same user. For example, the IP in question has edited Talk:Tropical Storm Zeta (2005) with a similar manner as HT495 (then known as WesternAtlanticCentral). Also, the IP has reported pages to RFPP, as HT495 has done numerous times. The contibs log seems to match, and thus we can assume the IP is HT495. ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 14:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Darren-M: This is evidence that HT495 has used three IPs here on Wikipedia, possible before he created an account. ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 14:26, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Destroyeraa, There is no prohibition requiring IP editors to stick to one IP - indeed, many modern ISPs will make that impossible by assigning new ones periodically, and/or if you use different ways to connect (e.g. on your broadband at home, and then on mobile data while out and about). This is one of the reasons we strongly encourage IP editors to register. Best, Darren-M talk 14:35, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Darren-M: True. However, HT495 has used multiple IPs while doing (logged out editing), and it isn't his first offense. here, and twice on his archive. ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 14:37, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment HT495 is currently on a Wikibreak because of all of the stuff that he has reprimanded for, and it appears that he will not be back until the 19th, judging by This, so he is unlikely to respond to the warnings. Just thought that I should point that out. 🌀Weatherman27🏈 (Chat|Edits|sandbox) 17:51, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Statement by HurricaneTracker495

The following statement has been emailed to me by HurricaneTracker495 requesting that I post it here.

Subject: Please carry this over to Wikipedia on my talk page because I can’t edit it myself

Here is what I want you to carry over

“It was not me who made the edit. I did convince someone else to do it, which is technically a violation of WP: MEAT, but I didn’t make the edit myself. Therefore this can’t be considered a violation of WP: SOCK, although I will admit I commited meatpuppetry. — HurricaneTracker495”

Thank you

Best, Darren-M talk 19:08, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On the basis of the above admission of meatpuppetry, comments made in private, and of the other allegations on this page, notably the message by The Bushranger concerning HT's comments on ITN, I do not think anything can be gained by me continuing to offer HT advice & support. This offer is therefore withdrawn. Best, Darren-M talk 19:12, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
At this point, the only real thing that we could do is have a mentorship, as Hurricanehink mentioned on Destroyeraas talk page, as HT495 clearly is not taking advice and recommendations as he should, nor does he seem to take it seriously, based on the above sections. That is one of the only possible solutions that I can think of at the moment, that doesn't involve more consequential actions.🌀Weatherman27🏈 (Chat|Edits|sandbox) 19:25, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If no one wants to mentor me...I think evantually I can dig myself out of this hole. I'm increasing archiving to 30 days so, if it's truly resolved, it'll be begone in page history. --Hurricane Tracker 495 00:40, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The way you dig yourself out of the hole is not by sweeping the problem under the rug by archiving, but by actually listening to the advice that has been given to you and actually staying out of everything you are told to stay out of, as well as showing an improved attitude towards those who give you advice. The advice has become a demand because of the extent of your WP:IDHT issues. I hate to put it this harshly, but you really need to understand how close you are to exhausting the community's patience. If you are unsure even the slightest about whether an action would be proper (such as the above meatpupptery), you should ask for help rather than assuming that you somehow know it all, which you appear to have a pattern of.--Jasper Deng (talk) 10:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not invite problematic users to WPTC. Or any other WikiProject. We certainly do not want to have any toxic or disruptive users around. If he takes your suggestion to heart and shows up, if he choses to get all political or act in a disruptive way, not only will we have to clean up after his mess, but he'll also get reported to an admin noticeboard and get re-blocked, likely indefinitely. The only people who should be invited to WPTC are those with a clear interest in the subject, have the competence to conduct themselves, and good temperament. Please do not do this again. Until you become familiar with WPTC and much more experienced with Wikipedia policies in general, I would strongly suggest that you refrain from recruiting new users as well. We have others who are already taking care of recruitment. Thank you. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 08:53, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I never thought about that. Thanks,--Hurricane Tracker 495 13:25, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stay out, for real

You've been asked numerous times to stay out of user conduct matters, so what led you to this? This is not an appropriate use of that warning template, which is only for use for cases where the user removes a large amount of content without explanation, such as blanking the whole page. The other editors had a good handle on it, and you appear unable to explain why the content is not libellous. In this case, the editor had potentially valid grounds to remove the content for WP:BLP reasons (they don't in this case, but you need to understand why).

By now, you should know that other editors are as a whole frustrated with your dismissive attitude towards advice. Again, as a result, that advice has become a demand. This is a relatively minor error, but at this point, unless you seriously change your attitude and behavior, your next big error is almost certain to result in your getting blocked, and a supervisory, involuntary mentorship required for unblock. I expect you to acknowledge explicitly that you will refrain from further patrolling, and stick to the content work that you have done–your trimming of sections in 2020 Atlantic hurricane season is the kind of editing you should be doing now.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:15, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The reason why it was appropriate is because, it is necessary to explain, a big theme of the article. I also trimmed down Bertha. --Hurricane Tracker 495 22:19, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your explanation is wholly inadequate and I am left scratching my head as to what you mean by your first sentence. It's as if you did not at all read the first half of my comment.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:20, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What I meant was.....the article revolves on him being conspiracy theorist, so its necessary to include. --Hurricane Tracker 495 22:25, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Again, you have wholly missed my point. Do you know what the criteria are for including such information at all? I am also not fond of your decision to redact this; redaction of personal attacks should only be done in more offensive cases and by editors much more experienced than you, as it can have the effect of WP:POKEBEAR.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That may have been a bad idea. I have to go for a little while now. --Hurricane Tracker 495 22:29, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
When you get back, I expect you to thoroughly read through what I wrote and take it seriously. If I did not think you could improve, I would not be having this conversation with you. But I expect you to put in as much effort as I did in writing the above message. It's this pattern of poor judgement that has warranted the demand for you to stay out of conduct matters. I have yet to see acknowledgement of that, nor a promise to stay out, and I expect both.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:31, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It was just that in WPTC I am in hot water as well. If I completely retreat from patrolling, and I also have to retreat from WPTC, I am kinda stuck on USRD, and if I get stuck in hot water there, then I'm blocked.
But if you want me to help out Simple(which I am by citing sources and expanding there poor article), thats fine if you want me to completely retreat from enwiki for a while. --Hurricane Tracker 495 22:37, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your mistakes in WPTC are far more benign as they are being corrected by experienced editors. We can't have you give misleading advice or impressions to new users (WP:BITE). If your goal is to become an admin here, note that this pattern of poor judgement and dismissing others' concerns (by clearly not taking them seriously) will cause you to fail overwhelmingly. I already told you what is working, namely your trimming of the 2020 AHS, so this is not just about "this is not working". But you really do need to listen to others when they give you advice. Think about why you are in hot water and formulate specific actions to take to stay out. Staying out of user conduct issues and patrolling, and listening to others, are the two most obvious ones, but it need not be limited to those.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:44, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that I can see you're point. Trimming it down is working, but evantually, it's trimmed too much. I think my 3rd issue is the meatpuppetry. --Hurricane Tracker 495 22:54, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about a first, second, or third issue. All of your behavior, including the meatpuppetry, is reflective of your overall attitude and your judgement. You ought to stop and think before all of your actions. No mentor can do that for you. And also, everyone makes mistakes, but you need to be receptive to the feedback. You did not even reply to The Bushranger's comment above. I have yet to see a commitment to change that attitude.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:57, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Now, I have. --Hurricane Tracker 495 23:10, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I won't sweat that one too much since it's somewhat old now, but I don't see that you have addressed his concerns. Are you willing to commit to taking every comment as seriously as the ones I've made here?--Jasper Deng (talk) 23:13, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If the commitments are (1) to help out Simple, (2) to stop patrolling(of course if there's blatant vandalism on an article I'm editing, I'll revert it(though probably won't give a warning), (3) to stop my WP: MEAT violations(even though I don't consider MEAT that severe as the other person needs commitment themselves)and (4) to continue to trim down 2020 AHS, I agree. I would even agree to a complete refocus to Simple if needed. But a complicated restriction is not a very good one. --Hurricane Tracker 495 23:18, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Let me spell them out more specifically.
  1. You stop patrolling for vandalism except for articles you happen to be already actively working on;
  2. You commit to responding to every comment other editors put on this talk page in a way that earnestly addresses their concerns;
  3. You thoroughly read up policies and guidelines before you apply them, and ask questions (at places like WP:VPP for instance) if you are confused (they are admittedly complex);
  4. You continue to overall focus on content work and abstain completely from user conduct issues that do not directly involve you (i.e. are not due to concerns raised by other editors about your behavior)
  5. Along the lines of point 3, you comply with all policies you are already aware of (such as MEAT) and make every effort to know which policies govern an action of yours
It's not a restriction. It's a change of approach and attitude that I'm looking for here.--Jasper Deng (talk) 23:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, that definitely helps. But wait, I should still be able to participate in WPTC discussions(as in, other users issues. I definitely do feel that it is a bit harsh to not allow me to take part in any discussion. By the way, I owe a response to USRD. --Hurricane Tracker 495 23:31, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, it should be articles in an area I have a clear interest. I, for example, am not working on I-25, but I should be allowed to revert any vandalism on I-25, as it is within an area I am working on. --Hurricane Tracker 495 23:46, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I, with due respect, ask that you abide by the stricter commitments first. These were deliberately worded so as to not be WP:GAME'able.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:07, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but it also appears I misunderstood one of them saying "conduct"(as in I can participate in content discussions, which is good). --Hurricane Tracker 495 00:12, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Conduct" meaning the actions of another user, broadly construed, particularly including warnings. Even in content discussions, the other points I brought up here still apply.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, I have a question. If I am reverting vandalism on I-90, an article I have worked on quite a bit(especially with Talk: Interstate 90#Replace I-77 with I-39?), would I then have to (a) ask another user to warn or (b) not waen, or could I then warn with grave care not to choose the wrong one and with it being reviewed? --Hurricane Tracker 495 00:28, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You can revert vandalism on a page you have done significant work on -- i.e. not just other vandalism reverts, tagging, etc. So that'd count. Again, please try to abide by the spirit of this and not split hairs. WP:IAR exists for the most extreme cases but really try to restrain yourself at first.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:37, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Now I see. --Hurricane Tracker 495 00:48, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help with my draft please:

Would you be interested in helping me with Draft:Extremely Severe Cyclonic Storm BOB 05? I'm also having issues. 🌀☾⊙☈⊙♫ꍏ🌀 17:27, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyclone Corona: If you are willing to help me with Draft: Effects of Hurricane Andrew in Louisiana. But only a little, and not now. --Hurricane Tracker 495 18:38, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I can't find many reliable sources. I have WP: GNG concerns, as I literally can't find a source saying it killed 12 people. --Hurricane Tracker 495 18:47, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays!

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message
~ Destroyer🌀🌀 13:26, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Destroyeraa was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
~ Destroyer🌀🌀 16:38, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, HurricaneTracker495! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 16:38, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Trouted

trout Self-trout For accidentally using a source you were using on Effects of Hurricane Andrew in Louisiana on Interstate 90. --Hurricane Tracker 495 22:12, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello HurricaneTracker495, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021.
Happy editing,

-Shift674-🌀 contribs Merry Christmas! 🎅🏻 02:10, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

-Shift674-🌀 contribs Merry Christmas! 🎅🏻 02:10, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --Hurricane Tracker 495 02:13, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays!

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Andrew in Louisiana

Hi HurricaneTracker495, and I hope you are enjoying your holiday break.

I am considering moving Effects of Hurricane Andrew in Louisiana back to draftspace because nearly all of the impact section is unsourced. The impact section is the most important section in an effects article. This is why I declined the draft yesterday.

There is no rush in making Andrew Louisiana into an article, so take your time. Enjoy the rest of your holiday break, and have a merry and safe Christmas! Cheers, ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 17:02, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Destroyeraa: Please give it a WP: CHANCE. I request you wait 10 days so I can improve it. Please honor this. --Hurricane Tracker 495 17:19, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. 10 days. ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 18:29, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Destroyeraa: Thanks and please help out with sourcing as well. --Hurricane Tracker 495 18:30, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]