User talk:BretHarteChitown: Difference between revisions

 

Line 1: Line 1:

{{User:MiszaBot/config

| algo = old(90d)

| archive = User talk:BretHarteChitown/Archive 1

| counter = 2

| maxarchivesize = 75k

| archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}}

| minthreadstoarchive = 1

| minthreadsleft = 2

}}

{{archives}}

== CS1 error on [[2025 New Orleans truck attack]] ==

== CS1 error on [[2025 New Orleans truck attack]] ==

Archives

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 90 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 2.

Hello, I’m Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 2025 New Orleans truck attack, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator.
Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 10:25, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On the article Pawan Singh you wrote the comment “Use sources using English when editing this article on English Wikipedia.” what is your justification for that? Non-English sources are perfectly valid here. — NotCharizard ^🗨 13:12, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As to your question, your right. English Wikipedia does allow non-English sources, but it is preferred to use English sources are preferred over non-English sources. That’s mostly my justification for that. If you want me to add the source back, I can do so, @Notcharizard. BretHarteChitown (talk) 13:28, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Add source meaning as in add the sources that weren’t in English back to the article. BretHarteChitown (talk) 13:36, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; however, please remember the essential rule of respecting copyrights. Edits to Wikipedia, such as your edit to the page Murder of Sonya Massey, may not contain material from copyrighted sources unless that text is available under a suitable free license. It is almost never okay to copy extensive text out of a book or website and paste it into a Wikipedia article with little or no alteration, though you can clearly and briefly quote copyrighted text in the right circumstances. Content that does not comply with this legal rule must be removed. For more information on this, see:

If you still have questions, there is the Teahouse, or you can click here to ask a question on your talk page and someone will be along to answer it shortly. As you get started, you may find the pages below to be helpful.

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:04, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting to say that I just copied text from the internet, because I tried to alter it in a way that would qualify Wikipedia’s standards. Can you please explain why you removed by revisions from the public view as you did on Murder of Sonya Massey. I was hoping to add in some of the information you removed. I would happily add them to the article when it’s more altered. BretHarteChitown (talk) 22:38, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits were a match for two different copyright websites. Everything you contribute needs to be written in your own words please. The revisions containing the copyright material were hidden from view under under criterion RD1 of the revision deletion policy, and that’s why you can’t access them any more. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 04:36, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for explaining. BretHarteChitown (talk) 05:07, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Aftermath of Springfield race riot of 1908 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://presidentlincoln.illinois.gov/Resources/310ee587-5442-444c-8165-7916f8903c85/springfield-race-riot-catalog.pdf. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia’s copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled “Contest this speedy deletion”. This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines. 🥭 Mango ^{[ talk | edits ]} 11:14, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 16:56, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Adam Lanza.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file’s talk page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Meters (talk) 22:49, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. I messed that up badly. He is indeed not alive, and the “believed to be Adam Lanza” was referring to the Wikipedia editor, not the subject of the image. Meters (talk) 23:48, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I now realize that you were referring to me. That I believed the image to be Adam Lanza. Which is true. Though I am not sure how you did not know that Lanza is dead. In the beginning of the article, Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, it states that “…Lanza killed himself with a gunshot to the head,” a clear indicator that he is deceased. I am willing to forgive and forget. BretHarteChitown (talk) 00:10, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea how I screwed this up so badly… a major self-trouting incident. It’s been a long time since I’ve botched anything this badly. And sorry if I wasn’t clear in my referring to the Wikipedia editor. The Wikipedia editor in question was indeed Adam Lanza, not you. The source for the image discusses Wikipedia edits that had been made by an editor believed to have been Lanza. Meters (talk) 00:49, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that makes more since. Understood. But that does Adam Lanza’s Wikipedia account have to do with the image? BretHarteChitown (talk) 02:16, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing, directly. When I checked your source the URL was entitled “…believed_to_be_Adam_Lanza”. At the time I could not access the source and I mistaken assumed that the “believed_to_be_Adam_Lanza” in the URL referred to the image. Now that I have been able to access the insecure page I see that the FBI believed Lanza had had a Wikipedia account and had been editing mass murders’ articles. Your source was discussing this, and there was no uncertainty over the identity of the image’s subject. Meters (talk) 09:44, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I wanted to let you know that in your recent contributions to Murder of Sonya Massey, you seemed to act as if you were the owner of the page. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. This means that editors do not own articles, including ones they create, and should respect the work of their fellow contributors. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. –DMartin (talk) 08:57, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain what make you believe that I behave as if I “own” an article? BretHarteChitown (talk) 09:01, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting without explanation(initially), refusing to even attempt to seek compromise or acknowledge my concerns, and leaving a needlessly agreeive Twinkle warning on my talk page. It’s fine we disagree, but you should remember to assume good faith. –DMartin (talk) 09:14, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I didn’t initially revert your edit without explaining. In fact, I first explained my reason for reverting on February 6, 2026.[1] Explaining that the source attached to the statement clearly called it late stage colon cancer. The Assoicated Press stated, “His attorney sought a sentence of six years, noting that Grayson has late stage colon cancer that has spread to his liver and lungs.” You changed it again, this time without explaination.[2] We could discuss it now if you choose so, but you can not revert my edits on Murder of Sonya Massey any longer if you want a resolution. BretHarteChitown (talk) 11:58, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]