User talk:Genesyz

Welcome!

Hello, Genesyz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 08:45, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You will find a maddening array of links from those above, but if there is a specific barrier to contributing content I may have an answer or know the particular page you are looking for. There are only a few things you need to know, and I constantly remind myself not to be too distracted from what is enjoyable and the best use of my time. cygnis insignis 07:57, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. I appreciate your time and assistance! Is it okay to ask you questions here about the discussions we've been having about the proposed moves? What is this page even called? Genesyz (talk) 17:07, 8 January 2019 (UTC)Genesyz[reply]

The page is named User_talk:Genesyz, linked in your signature, a means of communicating with an individual user. Feel free to post a enquiry on mine, linked from the following cygnis insignis 07:00, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

user-created mathematical expression

File:209sumsequence.jpeg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:209sumsequence.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:49, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at 209 (number). Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:22, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please add only legitimate reliable sources, and do not remove tags questioning the reliability. There first two seem self-published (by Wikipedia standards) and are not by recognized experts, and Mathworld is not reliable for concepts and the articles do not name 209. I think the Mathworld references could be replaced by OEIS references, so I'm not removing the clearly inappropriate references. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 22:47, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Genesyz reported by User:EEng (Result: ). Thank you. E Eng 05:01, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You still seem to be edit warring. Please participate in the discussion on Talk:209 (number) rather than continuing to push your edits on the article itself against the consensus on the talk page. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:42, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Genesyz. Speaking as an uninvolved administrator you really do need to use Talk:209 (number) to talk about this dispute. Editors who just push through the same changes again and again usually wind up blocked. I've protected the article for a day so no one can edit it. Please use this time to talk to the other editors. Reading WP:DR might give you some ideas. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:00, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And as I noted at the 209 talk page, please feel free to contact me about anything related to Wikipedia. I'm so sorry you've had to face this barrage of abuse, and hope it won't stop you from contributing in the future. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:29, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has raised questions about some of the sources you've used. Please check the talk page. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:42, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Other places where you can ask for help

WP:Help Desk and WP:TEAHOUSE. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:49, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

I'm sorry for the way you've been treated here. There's an endemic problem at the moment with some admins who aren't welcoming to individuals such as yourself. I'm more than happy to help you, but as you can imagine (and see), I'm also being treated in the same way. Keep up the good work, don't be discouraged, you're way beyond needing help per NeilN's advice, you need detailed and expert help and that was what I was hoping you'd get from Eppstein (an admin) and Rubin (a former admin), instead of the completely discouraging barrage of edits and threats you received. Let me know if I can help in the future. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:14, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, man. That was truly insane. I haven't been on here for a year, but the experience is much better this time (so far). I'm just here to give my two cents on three particular articles though and I'm out. I appreciate you being helpful and encouraging. I honestly cannot fathom how one simple mathematical expression I came across (I think on WolframAlpha) and thought would be interesting and innocuous enough addition to an article about the number 209 (of all things!) would cause such acrimony and rudeness. I did add other less interesting things to that article, but the whole thing was just ridiculous. And then actually accused me of an edit war, LOL. They think they own it and they can have it for all I'm concerned. I definitely have better things to do. Genesyz (talk) 17:31, 8 January 2019 (UTC)Genesyz[reply]