User talk:Z Luna Skye

From MicroWiki, the micronational encyclopædia
(Redirected from User talk:Z. Luna Skye)
Jump to: navigation, search

Flag of New Eiffel.svgTalk PageSpeech bubbles overlapping symbol.png

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Your input is welcomed and your help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated!.

THE ZARCHIVES

These are the discussion archives from my talk page. I make an archive every 15 messages. It is in order to save space.

Archive 1 (November 2018 – 20 February 2019); 15 distinct users
Archive 2 (20 February 2019 – 28 April 2019); 10 distinct users
Archive 3 (20 April 2019 – 30 August 2019); 14 distinct users
Archive 4 (30 August 2019 – 13 January 2020); 11 distinct users
Archive 5 (13 January 2020 – 17 March 2020); 9 distinct users
Archive 6 (12 April 2020 - 17 September 2020); 12 distinct users

NEW RESPONSES

Guess what

Just hit 10,000 edits, now im a real editor just like you senpai--Guess I never Miss (talk) 20:24, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Y e s that is amazing! - Thank you for your dedication to the best website on the internet :3 Flag of New Eiffel.svg/Royal coat of arms of New Eiffel.svg Zed Zarel  My Talk Page  Contribs  7:39 p.m. (1739), 18 September 2020 (UTC+1)

User abusing on Ebenthal's main article

Hello, Zarel. Here I am again. As you are the only administrator I have had contact here so far, I'd like to ask you to oversee over a situation. User:Cookieman1.1.1. has three times so far deliberately added the "dubious tag" to Ebenthal's main article with no further talk or discussion in the matter, simply by stating that one photo in use in the past wasn't truthful to the micronation, and indeed, it wasn't, I added it in order to test the article's color layout as I wanted a dark-colored photo. I took down the tag because tags are meant to be added in virtue of a discussion, and there's none. He did it again saying I can't prove the photos. Well, many of the article's photos deliberately states that they are illustrations.

  • The photo of the Castle of Ebenthal in Austria saying that the country was named after it.
  • The photo of a room at the Quintadinha Palace in Petrópolis, saying the place was chosen to held the presential summit of the Conference of Santiago (it is a free place open to public)
  • The photo on the military section of the CAMPSEG company, which the Ebenthali State unilaterally consider as providers of soldiers (as the company is presently hired to protect two farms which compose Ebenthali's territory.
  • The photo of the Court Room of the Tribune of Truth, saying it is located at the UNESA, the college I attend (the room has free acess and we use it when we can).
  • The photos of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro and Copastar Hospital, saying they are the college and hospital most attended by Ebenthalis.

Etc, etc, etc. Again, he says I can't prove it. Well, how would I? What does he wants, a copy of the contract between my great-aunt and the CAMPSEG security company proving they work for my family, a certificate by the UNESA proving I can use their rooms, physicians receipts proving my family and some friends frequent the Copastar Hospital, my bachelor certificate at the Federal University, my signature in a solar panel proving they're in my family's property? This is utterly absurd. And I'd like to add, he requires proof, but could he prove Free Socialist State of Paloma's photos, for example I shall I tag him with no talks on my own? Anyway, I'm really sorry to bother your with this, but I hope something can be done for him to stop simply messing with my article for no reason. Thank you in advance. Arthur Brum (talk) 04:50, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I thank you for giving it attention on talking to cookieman. He has added the tag again and started a discussion on talk page. I may be new here but I have been editing on Wikipedia since 2011, one single person can't simply doubt a thing and add tag to an article, much less when the doubt is based on "you can't prove". He said he has taken this to adminship, well, so far no admin has contacted me, and it has been days since he has adding this damn tag on my article. Anyway, the Talk:Ebenthal is going on now, can I ask you to give this some attention and end this annoying non-sense of his part? Both of us, he and me, have already spoken for our sides, and I'm afraid things will be just this way if I didn't warn some admin. Again, I'm sorry to bother you with this, but you are so far the only admin I have had contact here. Arthur Brum (talk) 22:19, 5 October 2020 (UTC)