User talk:Raskuly: Difference between revisions

Line 71: Line 71:

:::I had an edit notice added to the page to try to dissuade adding incidents which don’t meet the requirements of the list. [[User:Raskuly|Raskuly]] ([[User talk:Raskuly#top|talk]]) 10:13, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

::::Thank you for your effort, but I don’t see it in the history around the date in your sig. Do you have the diff? [[User:Mapsax|Mapsax]] ([[User talk:Mapsax|talk]]) 02:04, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

:::::I requested an edit notice at [[Template talk:Editnotices/Page/List of mass shootings in the United States in 2025]] as I don’t have the permissions to create one myself. See [[WP:EDNO]]. [[User:Raskuly|Raskuly]] ([[User talk:Raskuly#top|talk]]) 02:37, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

== August 2025 ==

Hi Raskuly. don’t know if any of the sports pages you keep an eye on are under pending changes yet; but sportspeople do sometimes become controversial so it is probably only a matter of time. So I have set your account as a “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. And more importantly, any on your watchlist will get highlighted.

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:

Cheers and Happy editing! Ϣere SpielChequers 10:15, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wow, I’m surprised to have been given this right. I’ll do my best. Thank you so much. Raskuly (talk) 14:16, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m sure you’ll do fine. Just remember to err on the side of caution – if it is a good faith edit that you disagree with on a page you have edited, sometimes it is best to wait for an uninvolved editor to accept or reject an edit. Ϣere SpielChequers 17:39, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I noticed a change of name on an article I created. The name was intially Shakur Mohammed. However it’s not Shakur Mohammed. I did a search of the team’s website and didn’t see Shak Mohammed. Unless that isn’t the website you referred to.

https://www.mlssoccer.com/players/shakur-mohammed/ or
https://www.orlandocitysc.com/players/shakur-mohammed/

Kindly share with me the website that says he goes by Shak Mohammed.

Thank you. Ampimd (talk) 14:57, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.orlandocitysc.com/roster/ Raskuly (talk) 15:02, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Your edit capitalizing “secretary of labor” was incorrect per MOS:JOBTITLES. In running sentences it is treated as a position not a title. I.e. “Secretary Kristi Noem”, but “the former secretary Kristi Noem” are both correct. Thank you for helping Wikipedia. Wamalotpark (talk) 22:17, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Raskuly (talk) 13:21, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All of you don’t know how to update the terror list the most ngl. Devon454 (talk) 03:08, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No it’s bs that we gonna start over everything and all of the data legit this is bs and I don’t get why you think u own it you don’t no one does but the gov but legit you know what do it yourself all of it we are not gonna help you. Devon454 (talk) 03:12, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You know your a dumb person legit who give you the right to make rules on the shooting list and btw learn to add shit right all of you Devon454 (talk) 03:08, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You know you gonna be kicked off you don’t make the rules furry your a hacker bet you think you got the right to change the things and data just bcuz of the shooting in Illinois have fun doing it yourself I’m not gonna help you guys edit shit no more bye. Devon454 (talk) 03:16, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m pissed bcuz you wasted all of our time helping you. Devon454 (talk) 03:29, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know who you are and what you’re talking about. Raskuly (talk) 07:48, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Forget about it Devon454 (talk) 15:10, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And what ur doing is gonna be vandalism Devon454 (talk) 03:24, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I saw that you recently changed the short descriptions of many shootings. Is there a reason you removed the year when there’s more than enough space left in the SD for it? Aaron Liu (talk) 18:15, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve nothing against it. Raskuly (talk) 18:47, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I notice you recently changed a short description from “2025 homicide in Texas” to “2025 homicide in Texas, U.S.”; do you think that was necessary? Is there another Texas so well known that we need to disambiguate the one intended? ~ Lindsay^Hello 09:23, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, but I was following what I had seen on other articles. It doesn’t seem to problematic based on WP:SDESC. Raskuly (talk) 09:32, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, we’ll have to agree to disagree ~ which is absolutely fine, of course; i read WP:SDPURPOSE (and the whole info page) to imply that the short description should only be as long as necessary to supplement the title and make it clear for the reader what the article subject is so, with that in mind, i don’t see the necessity for “U.S.” here. I should point out, however, that i think adding dates (birth, death, reign, etc.) to short descriptions when not needed is also silly, but i never undo them, so thanks for answering and i now return you to your previously scheduled editing ~ Lindsay^Hello 10:37, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not simply replace old photos, re-locate them. Giant Snowman 18:30, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, if there’s room. Raskuly (talk) 18:33, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that Talk:List of mass shootings in the United States in 2025 § Misleading definition shows that the question of any perpetrator being a potential victim was never resolved, so as of now the lead remains with “Mass shootings are incidents in which several people are injured or killed due to firearm-related violence, specifically for the purposes of this article, a total of four or more victims” without any distinction. (Note that there should probably be a “with” before “a total”.) So until this gets resolved with a consensus, I believe that all edits which involve four injuries/deaths including the perpetrator, including mine, should be restored until such time that the lead is changed to include that stipulation, at which time they would be removed again. Mapsax (talk) 00:39, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first sentence of the article is “This is a list of mass shootings that took place in the United States in 2025. Mass shootings are incidents in which several people are injured or killed due to firearm-related violence, specifically for the purposes of this article, a total of four or more victims.” A perpetrator is not a victim. The inclusion of incidents with less than four victims, but four casualties, was a result of bad enforcement of the purpose of the article, so I disagree strongly that incidents with less than four victims should be allowed on the article. Raskuly (talk) 01:50, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A perpetrator can also be a victim depending on interpretation. The definitions listed beyond the lead clarify this with “excluding the perpetrators”. The lead does not. I’m not arguing for or against, I just would like to see clarity and consistency. Mapsax (talk) 02:08, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The better decision would be to provide further clarity in the lead what the list is for, not to go against what the purpose of the list is. Again, a perpetrator is not a victim, according to the Cambridge Dictionary the word means “someone who has committed a crime or a violent or harmful act”. This is going to come off as blunt, but interpreting perpetrators as victims would mean that you would consider mass murderers like Stephen Paddock and Omar Mateen as victims of their heinous crimes. Raskuly (talk) 02:19, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I had an edit notice added to the page to try to dissuade adding incidents which don’t meet the requirements of the list. Raskuly (talk) 10:13, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your effort, but I don’t see it in the history around the date in your sig. Do you have the diff? Mapsax (talk) 02:04, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I requested an edit notice at Template talk:Editnotices/Page/List of mass shootings in the United States in 2025 as I don’t have the permissions to create one myself. See WP:EDNO. Raskuly (talk) 02:37, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Highland Park parade shooting has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:40, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean I added copyrighted content? I added text only and if it were deemed to not be paraphrased or rewritten well enough it would be one thing, but even if that were the case it could just be rewritten. I’m shocked and this seems like an extreme over reaction. I can’t even see what I wrote and see what I possibly did wrong because you scrubbed it from the website. Threatening me with a block is insane. I’m afraid to even try to fix what I apparently did wrong now because I don’t understand how my edit elicited such a reaction in the first place. Raskuly (talk) 18:56, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While I do occasionally paraphrase the copyvio material myself, given the volume of copyvio reports that are filed each day and the amount of time it takes to assess and clean the articles and notify and/or discuss with the editors involved, it’s not possible for me to perform re-writes in each instance. Removal of the copyright material from the page history was done under criterion RD1 of the revision deletion policy. Here is a comparison of your edit with the source webpage. Overlapping content is shown in bold:

Source says:

Crimo arrived at the Lake County courthouse wearing a white T-shirt with large black letters reading: “I’m A Political Pawn.” The back said: “LAWS, FACTS, REALITY.” He turned it inside out before entering the courtroom, but the judge threatened to hold him in contempt of court if he violated court rules again, according to his lawyer, George Gomez, who said he did not know what his client’s shirt meant.

Your addition:

On November 15, ahead of his imprisonment, Crimo Jr. arrived at the Lake County courthouse wearing a white t-shirt with large black letters reading: “I’m A Political Pawn” on the front and “LAWS, FACTS, REALITY.” on the back. Crimo Jr. turned the shirt inside out before entering the courtroom, but the judge threatened to hold him contempt of court if he did it again due to a court decorum order prohibiting any spectator from wearing or displaying a message that could affect the orderly administration of proceedings. Crimo Jr.’s lawyer, George Gomez, said he did not know what his client’s shirt meant.

Hello, I wanted to ask about an entry you created back on December 28, 2024. You added a section about the attack to the news station’s page. I was curious why you added it. There’s nothing wrong with it. It’s just intriguing as I recall when the news broke and when it happened. 2603:9000:8600:205F:A50F:5E23:541A:6F4A (talk) 06:19, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please link stuff like this in the future, though I did find what you’re referring to. I added it because Alex was attacked while on the job for KKCO and because the physical part of the attack happened at the news station. The attack received national attention if I recall correctly, and adding a subsection about it to the station’s article seemed appropriate. Raskuly (talk) 08:36, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, I am not well versed with using Wikipedia for discussion and I got tunnel vision after reading the entry. I was told the entry existed and was curious. I don’t have any way to prove it on this platform, but I am guy who got attacked and thought it was cool. Thank you, I always used Wikipedia to learn about things and it’s weird to see my own name on the site. 2603:9000:8600:205F:A50F:5E23:541A:6F4A (talk) 18:03, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keith Myrick, thoroughbred racehorse owner and former professional basketball player

a friend sent me a message asking why the Wikipedia page (see above) about me was removed. It appears you had removed this? I don’t know anything about how Wikipedia works but I did have a page related to my previous professional basketball career in the Euroleague and my career in horse racing. Just curious. You can view an article about me in the international business times that my college basketball coach had sent me. Thank you 74.134.232.118 (talk) 01:25, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not the one who deleted the article nor have I ever interacted with it. That was User:Explicit. According to the deletion log it was deleted under WP:G5 because it was created by a previously banned user who was using another account. I’m not an admin so I can’t tell you what the article looked like at the time of its deletion. I do not know whether or not you would meet our notability guidelines (see WP:NOTABILITY). Raskuly (talk) 01:36, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, can I ask you something? Not to be a hypocrite, but… I noticed you’re removing mass shooting cases from USA 2025. Why? I’ve seen many mass shooting cases that resulted in three victims and the shooter being shot being included in other articles lists. There was even a familicides that resulted in four people being shot, including the shooter, and in that 2025 article, you removed it. Why are you removing these cases from this 2025 article? 2804:7F0:9701:4E5:466:7603:CB67:D883 (talk) 23:11, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you’re referring to the List of mass shootings in the United States in 2025 article, and I remove incidents which do not meet the minimum requirement of four gunshot victims which based on the criteria laid out in those lists is the minimum for an incident to be considered a mass shooting. A perpetrator or suspect is not a victim. So to answer your question, I am not removing mass shootings, I am removing incidents which have been falsely labeled as such. The other List of mass shootings in the United States lists need to be fixed and eventually I’ll get around to that, but I would be more than happy if someone else would take it upon themselves to help fix this widespread issue. Raskuly (talk) 23:19, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per Talk:List of law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty in the United States, To be included on this stand-alone list, each entry should meet the following list criteria:
Per common list selection criterion #1, every entry should meet the notability criteria for its own article in the English Wikipedia. I noticed that you just added a very large number of names, increasing the article size by 50% and breaking citation templates due to exceeding the WP:PEIS limit, but most of these entries are officers who are not notable enough for their own article (or who did not die in a notable incident), and the entry is only cited to odmp.org, which is WP:UGC and not an indicator of notability. Please remove all entries where the officer is not independently notable. —Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 14:53, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did not see that in the talk page since it was archived, I’ll work on adding that to the actual article so the purpose of the article is more clear. This makes my task of fixing up the article MUCH easier. Raskuly (talk) 15:03, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Raskuly Thanks! —Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 16:50, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m still working on fixing the article, but I do believe the article is now small enough that the maintenance template is not applicable! 🙂 Raskuly (talk) 16:38, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know it’s only three, but two of the definitions of “mass shooting” listed at the beginning of the article say three or more is considered a mass shooting, so I figured I’d add it. 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (need something? Ping me!) 23:13, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That section is about the various definitions of what constitutes a mass shooting, but the consensus is that mass shootings are incidents in which there are four or more gunshot victims, which is stated in the lead and notice. Raskuly (talk) 23:15, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry, I didn’t see that. Thank you! 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (need something? Ping me!) 23:34, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, brain failure there. ParkingTheBus (talk) 11:32, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]