User talk:Firefly115

Please leave your feedback here. Also, I collect fireflies :) <3

Archives

Rollback granted[edit]

Hi Firefly115. After reviewing your request, I have enabled rollback on your account. Please keep the following things in mind while using rollback:

Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle or RedWarn.
Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
Rollback should never be used to edit war.
If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:38, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook[edit]

This is a far-right anti-vax talking point cited, twice, to a “libertarian” blog. I really don’t see it surviving long in the article when other editors see it, but if it suits your political viewpoint to have it there, I’m not going to join you in edit warring over it. — Trey Maturin™ 01:35, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Respectfully, what I put was a piece of criticism that others have noted that was not noted anywhere on the article and Reason is an RS. That being said, I appreciate it us not warring over it. Firefly115 (talk) 01:37, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A firefly for you![edit]

A firefly picture, I thought you might like it. Thanks for reverting vandalism! ButterCashier (talk) 15:11, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How sweet! Thank you so much, that made my day <3 :) Firefly115 (talk) 15:12, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes reviewer granted[edit]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "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.

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:

Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:55, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ion page[edit]

I think my edit for the Ion disambiguation made sense. What was wrong with it? GoutComplex (talk) 21:34, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023[edit]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

--Blablubbs (talk) 12:42, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It surprises me that I have been blocked for "sock puppetry" since I have no idea what or who I am "puppeteering" for.

Editing Wikipedia was enjoyable, but if I am going to be attacked or blocked without due process, I'm probably better off pursuing other activities. Thanks and goodbye. Firefly115 (talk) 17:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]