User talk:Staticspector

June 2026

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contribution(s). However, as a general rule, while user talk pages permit a small degree of generalisation, other talk pages are strictly for discussing improvements to their associated main pages, and many of them have special instructions on the top. They are not a search engine, a chatbot, or a general discussion forum about the article's topic or any other topic. If you have questions or ideas and are not sure where to post them, consider asking at the Teahouse. Thanks. Gnomingstuff (talk) 00:09, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

About your reversion

Hello, I saw the diff that you reverted and also believed it to possibly be vandalism; it is unsourced. However, I have verified this claim through a primary source, and was in the process of fully adding this information to the article when you reverted it. If you'd like to discuss this with me, feel free to ping or use my talk page. Thank you Shield ^{\\ |T| - |C| \\} 21:28, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

Also, I'll subst this template below, it also applies:

Hello Staticspector. Regarding the recent revert you made: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Shield ^{\\ |T| - |C| \\} 21:30, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

Hey @.sh1eldo7, my mistake on the revert i saw an unsourced edit and jumped. Appreciate you for reaching out and letting me know and thanks for the tip. Staticspector (talk) 21:44, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

@Staticspector Of course, no problem, we all make mistakes; last night I reverted a consensus-based page merging because it looked like a mass page blanking. Going to go ahead and reimplement those changes now. Thank you Shield ^{\\ |T| - |C| \\} 21:45, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

Your "close" on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chinmaya Vidyalaya, Nauni

Hello, please do not attempt to "close" AfD discussions like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chinmaya Vidyalaya, Nauni where you cannot implement the closure outcome. Such closures are WP:BADNACs. A non-admin should never close a discussion with a "delete" outcome since they lack the permissions to effect the closure. Thanks. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:44, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Hello @Dclemens1971 I recently went to the help desk and asked for advice on how to close AFD'S. I was given this link WP:XFDCLOSE. I believed I followed all procedures properly and found an article which had more than 7 days within the afd page. I don't understand what is the difference between my closure and these Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zoha Rahman. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siddhartha School. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saket Public School, Lanji. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Sunday (Sutter Kain & Donnie Darko album). Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gearhead Garage. If you could guide me so i can learn from this incident and not run into this issue again would be appreciated thank you. Staticspector (talk) 19:26, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

The difference between all the AfDs you linked and the one you attempted to close is that the other non-admin closers could actually implement the closes they selected. Please read WP:BADNAC very carefully: A non-admin closure may not be appropriate in any of the following situations:... The result will require action by an administrator, or are expected to be done by an administrator: Deletion (except for TfD discussions where orphaning is needed, or CfD discussions where the non-admin can post at WT:CFDW).... A non-admin should never close a discussion with an outcome of "delete", which you attempted to. (I would generally argue non-admins should not make "no consensus" closes either, since that is inherently a case where discretion may be required to determine the state of the consensus. Thanks for your effort to help, but please do not attempt to close any discussions as deletions unless you become an admin. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:33, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@Dclemens1971 Thank you for taking your time to explain WP:BADNAC and clarifying the restriction for non admins. I understand now that I can only close discussion with outcome like merge, keep, or redirect. I appreciate you for taking the time to guide me and teaching me the ropes! It is much appreciated. Have a great day! Staticspector (talk) 20:13, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your participation! Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:24, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@Dclemens1971 sorry to be a nuisance i just completed a new xfd for a keep consensus and just wanted to confirm that wasn't any issues with this one. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sikhism in Catalonia. if you could take a moment and just review it over for me would be a majorly appreciated thank you for your time once more. Staticspector (talk) 21:57, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

That is the correct consensus, but you didn’t actually close the discussion. You can use the XfDCloser tool or follow the manual steps. In this case, the discussion is not yet closed. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:10, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Jose Antonio Salcedo Reversion

Hi, you just reverted a change I made to an article. This is my first time editing an article so apologies if I didn't give the best explanation but the part of the article I removed was written in the first person and contained personal information that doesn't fit in a Wikipedia article. My edit summary says "Removed personal narrative from article". What should I have written instead? Thanks. Kcr1023 (talk) 19:38, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Your close on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Light Brick Studio

Would have made sense for a deletion discussion. But this was a merge discussion and whether it was notable was not up for debate. None of the responses addressed the actual argument presented of WP:NOPAGE. I think it was a BADNAC so I am thinking you should reverse this close and relist it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:06, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

@Zxcvbnm I remove my comment for closing and went to relist the page. I've was given an error stating i can't relist the page because it is still closed. After further review of the page you were totally correct the proper result is for a merge per as you said Wikipedia:NOPAGE If you could walk me through on how to actual revert the close and how to relist the page would be appreciated, thank you. Staticspector (talk) 09:55, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

The undo function on every related edit of the AfD and page would reverse it. Nothing more complex than that to be honest. It would just auto relist. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:30, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

I've never preformed this task before so I am a bit confused. I went back to the page went to undo the the keep closer and the page gave me a red error stating it has to be preformed manually can you walk me through this please. Staticspector (talk) 22:29, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

Just perform a full roll back to the page before you edited it, not just remove the text. Go into history, click on the the time stamp the page was and save that page. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:45, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

@Zxcvbnm I have reverted the close and relisted the page thank for your guidance. Staticspector (talk) 04:05, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Invite

Hello @Issac I Navarro thank you for the invitation. Look forward to be working with you. Staticspector (talk) 02:38, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

If you ever want to ask a question, or have any concerns, you are welcome to always send a WP:PING. Issac I Navarro (talk) 02:46, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much @Issac I Navarro means a lot to have someone offer help in learning. I have had some bumps along the way but I've learn from mistake and always looking to get better. I look over your profile I haven't meet a editor with some much involvement before. Your page sent me down a bit of a rabbit hole lol. I went to the Wikipediholism test page and found Wikipedihol page. That one also gave me a chuckle, but thanks again I appreciate the extended hand. Staticspector (talk) 03:51, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

Thats funny you say that I have a lot of involvement, I would consider for the most part, I usually keep to myself by my editing habits. But, always appreciate working with others. I've been more involved with WikiProject Schools trying to address some old maintenance that was asked years ago, but was never done.

I always welcome a ping from others. If you do, have any questions, I will do my best to answer any you may have. I was new once and know how it can be, there are some common mistakes that some make. Thus, always feel free to ask. Issac I Navarro (talk) 04:07, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

The reason i said you have a lot of involvement is because your userbox has a lot of projects.

Your one of the very few interaction i have with on here. So it a nice change to find someone who is will to teach. As I start going over the school projects. I will gather up some question and come back to you.

Its been nice meeting and conversing with you Issac, have a good night. Staticspector (talk) 04:20, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

Your closure of Articles for deletion/300-page iPhone bill

Your closure does not explain how you reached your result. I disagree that there was no consensus. Non-admin closure are usually improper if a closure is controversial (see the policy about that at WP:NACD). Would you consider reverting your closure and letting the discussion be closed by an admin? Otherwise I plan to bring it to WP:DRV. Thanks! FaviFake (talk) 23:09, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

@FaviFake well as i was reading the discussion it seemed somewhat split, which is how i came to my conclusion. however, I have gone ahead and reverted to allow an admin to take over. Have a good night Staticspector (talk) 23:49, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! You too.

Note that on Wikipedia discussions are not evaluated based on how many people voted a certain way. Learn more at WP:ROUGHC, WP:NOTAVOTE, and WP:CON. FaviFake (talk) 00:09, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

See? An admin found consensus to merge because they weighted the different arguments based on how rooted in policy they were. FaviFake (talk) 14:42, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

ahhhh i see ok ok, that's is a big difference. I really appreciate the policies those gave me a lot of insight to have a clearer understanding on how to properly close. Staticspector (talk) 19:56, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

That's perfect, I'm glad I could help! FaviFake (talk) 19:58, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

Regarding ~2026-56874-93

Hello Staticspector, I know noticed that when you warned the temporary account ~2026-56874-93 you gave them a level 2 warning when the user in question has never had any prior warnings or edits. In the future please give users with no prior history of warnings a level 1 warning instead of level 2.

With Regards User:TheCapitalofFranceisParis‬ 20:12, 23 October 2026 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheCapitalofFranceisParis (talk • contribs)

ok understood have a good day Staticspector (talk) 20:30, 23 October 2026 (UTC)