W
Active Editors
Back to Profile

User Talk: ButteyFelicity

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.


<!-- ##RW UNDERDATE## -->

Welcome!


thumb|alt=A plate of chocolate chip cookies.|Help:Getting started|'''Welcome!''' ↗ ↗
Hello, ButteyFelicity, and '''''welcome to Wikipedia ↗'''''! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the '''Wikipedia Teahouse ↗'''.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian ↗! Please sign your name ↗ on talk pages ↗ using four tilde ↗s (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our '''help pages''' ↗, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place '''{{Tlc|Help me}}''' on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome!<!-- Template:Welcome_cookie --> Chess enjoyer (talk) 21:36, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Nomination of :Killing of Sheridan Gorman ↗ for deletion


<div class="afd-notice">
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0;">48px|alt=|link= ↗</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article :Killing of Sheridan Gorman ↗ is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ↗ or whether it should be deleted ↗.

The article is being discussed at '''Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Killing of Sheridan Gorman ↗''' until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the AfD notice from the article until the discussion is closed.<!-- Template:Afd notice --></div> <span style="color:#008f39;font-family:cursive;font-size:110%;font-weight:bold;">Kqol</span> <span style="color:#008f39;">•</span> <span style="color:#008f39;"><small><i>talk</i></small></span> 15:53, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

:I did put evidence. For some reason its disproven it and not claiming its true. I hope its not bias ButteyFelicity (talk) 17:13, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

April 2026


48px|left|alt=|link= ↗

A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion ↗.

'''Do not''' create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage ↗ their subject or any other entity. Attack pages and files '''are not tolerated''' by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be '''blocked ↗ from editing'''. <!-- Template:Db-attack-notice --> <!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> Fram (talk) 16:55, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

:How is it an attack page? Im not attacking the subject or the perpetrator. Im just using what the article said. ButteyFelicity (talk) 17:10, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

{{u|Fram}}, {{u|Significa liberdade}} please note that Killing of Sheridan Gorman ↗ has been recreated. <span style="color: #996600">Spiderone</span><sup><span style="color:brown">(Talk to Spider)</span></sup> 18:37, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics


{{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = You have recently edited a page related to ''' living or recently deceased subjects of biographical content on Wikipedia articles''', a topic designated as '''''contentious ↗'''''. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and <em>does <strong>not</strong> imply that there are any issues with your editing</em>.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as ''contentious topics''. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee ↗. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators ↗ have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit <strong>carefully and constructively</strong>, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

<p>Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics <em>procedures</em>, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard ↗ or you may learn more about this contentious topic ↗. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{tl|Ctopics/aware}} template. </p>}}<!-- Derived from Template:Contentious topics/alert/first --> Significa liberdade <small>(she/her)</small> (talk) 16:57, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on Killing of Sheridan Gorman ↗


25px|alt=|link= ↗ Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have '''automatically detected''' that this edit ↗ performed by you, on the page :Killing of Sheridan Gorman ↗, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive ↗, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/Botpreload&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/Boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%20ButteyFelicity&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d={{FULLPAGENAMEE:Killing of Sheridan Gorman}}&preloadparams%5b%5d=1348656999 report it to my operator].
Thanks, <!-- User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/inform -->Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 18:39, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Killing of Sheridan Gorman ↗ moved to draftspace



Thanks for your contributions to Killing of Sheridan Gorman ↗. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because '''needs sources to establish it meets WP:NEVENT ↗ and also does not run afoul of WP:BLP ↗. See also WP:NOTNEWS ↗.'''.
I have converted it to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page ↗.
When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. S0091 (talk) 19:12, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

:Hi ButteyFelicity, I do not think you have any ill-intent but Wikipedia does have stringent policies and guidelines and because you are new you simply are not yet aware of them yet. Right now, the big one is to not name suspects of a crime, unless they are public person, like a politician, well-known business person or something like that, which this suspect is not. I have removed the name so please do not add it back. As it stands, I also do not think the article meets the notability guidelines. People are killed everyday and sometimes they even make headlines in the national news for a short time but what is needed is to show sustained coverage outside of the local area. Generally editors want to see national coverage which right now none of the sources meet. They are all local outlets, with only one being outside the Chicago area and that one is based almost entirely on the what the family says, therefore a WP:Primary source ↗ so not useful for notability,
:You are welcome to continue to work on the draft and I strongly suggest submitting it for review rather than moving to back to mainspace (Article) yourself so you can get feedback. If you have questions about the draft or editing Wikipedia in general, you can ask at the Teahouse ↗. S0091 (talk) 19:38, 13 April 2026 (UTC)
::Thank you. Im just passionate about getting information out there. You have been the only one understanding of the matter. And the guidelines yeah… though his name was out there already so i thought it was ok. Yes…you could say the same for Renee Good or Ashli Babbit though. Both people killed like ones everyday and are Notable for one event but also both demonstrate the failures of our government and country. Sheridan is notable for many things. Not for just being killed. She came in the time when Renee and Alex were killed by ICE agents and how discussions of Abolish ICE were becoming more mainstream since their deaths and how They finally left Minnesota….only for a month later a college student similar to Laken Riley and Mollie Tibbetts, to be allegedly murdered in cold blood by an illegal Immigrant. All three were young women with aspirations to live a bright and fulfilling life…only to be brutally murdered by Someone not supposed to be in our country. There is also another Wikipedia page mentioning her so who says she isn’t notable? The president and governor have commented on her as well. She has been in a press statement too.
::Also before Sheridan’s Murder, Another Illegal Immigrant Killed an Air Force Veteran by pushing him into the Tracks of a Subway, bringing a new discussion against the ideology of Illegal Aliens. The Deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti against the Deaths of Sheridan Gorman and Richard Williams.
::4 deaths, two different Ideologies
::Not ill intent someone suggested this for the talk page. Thank you again I’ll be better. ButteyFelicity (talk) 03:22, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

How to contribute to a requested move discussion



Please see WP:RMCOMMENT ↗, it will help to make the closer value your input more. <span style="background-color:orange; color:white;">'''Raskuly''' (🐰)</span> 02:15, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

:@Raskuly hi yes I am interested. Where shall I start? ButteyFelicity (talk) 16:25, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
::You improved your !vote at Talk:Thousand Oaks shooting ↗, I'm not sure what you mean. It was improperly formatted, and you made an entire other section about your argument, but you deleted that and formatted your comment. I assumed you had read WP:RMCOMMENT ↗ after my message here. <span style="background-color:orange; color:white;">'''Raskuly''' (🐰)</span> 17:27, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

April 2026



Hello. I closed your discussion at the Killing of Renée Good ↗ article because you included accusations against a recently killed person. There is no evidence that she was a member of an organization named Antifa, which is a movement not an organization. There is no evidence that she attempted to run down a person. Please read WP:BLP ↗. Wikipedia takes great care in contentious material about living or recently deceased persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced. O3000, Ret. (talk) 13:53, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

:I never said there was any evidence. Its being taken out of context. It wasn’t accusations to say the least. I wasn’t demeaning her in anyway you think I was. All I was saying that both woman are the same in many ways most don’t like to talk about. You closing my conversation proves my point to a T. And I did find that the accusations were falsified digging into it. I just looked at what was said and wanted to add the information. ButteyFelicity (talk) 17:16, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
::Hi again, from looking at your request, it appears you are, at least in part, engaging in WP:Original research ↗ (your own analysis, conclusions, etc.) which is not allowed here. Also, one source you used is a letter to the editor which is not a WP:reliable source ↗ and the other was likewise an option piece so not useful for claims of fact (outside of that person's opinion which only useful if they are an expert and even so requires care). Wikipedia only summarizes what WP:reliable sources ↗ explicitly state. This is now the third time you have violated the WP:BLP ↗ policy. Like I have said before, I don't think you are doing so intentionally but we are at the point you really need to starting getting a grasp of them. If you have not already, you do need to read the BLP policy along with the others I link pages. If you have question, ask at the WP:Teahouse ↗. S0091 (talk) 17:39, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
:::Im read it. It basically was not accuse or diminish the victim or not accuse anyone unless proven otherwise or stated. And I am not engaging in Original Research. Its not my own opinion and Im summarizing what is stated in the articles I mention. If it looks like that Im trying not to plagiarize what is stated in the article.I have used articles that have been stated elsewhere. ButteyFelicity (talk) 18:30, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
::::But as I stated, two of the articles you used are not reliable sources for statements of fact. Then you go on to make statements that are not supported at all by the third source (no mention of far right, far left, Quanon, Antifa, etc.) so yes you are engaging in original research. No offense, if you don't why that is a problem and how that violates polcies, I can't help you. And not sure why you are bringing up plagiarism as no one has mentioned it. S0091 (talk) 18:48, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
:::::Sure ok. I will learn better. But I thought it was common sense to know antifa and Quanon were far right and far left organizations. But I get your point. I did read over the bits of how not to accuse and such. I brought up plagiarism since If I directly used what the article said- copy and pasted it wouldn’t help either. I’ll try and get better research to prove my point. Its just I don’t understand how my points and references don’t count while someone’s of Renee’s Birth do even though Pretti’s which is public, doesn’t count. ButteyFelicity (talk) 20:38, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
::::::It's not 'common sense to know antifa... is a far left organisation', because it is not an organisation at all. (It's highly debatable whether QAnon is an organisation either.) GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:32, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on List of murdered American children ↗


25px|alt=|link= ↗ Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have '''automatically detected''' that this edit ↗ performed by you, on the page :List of murdered American children ↗, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive ↗, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/Botpreload&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/Boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%20ButteyFelicity&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d={{FULLPAGENAMEE:List of murdered American children}}&preloadparams%5b%5d=1350076885 report it to my operator].
Thanks, <!-- User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/inform -->Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 04:07, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Likens lists



Hi. Hope all is well

The articles are not to glorify or compare sadistic cases. The 'see also' section in Wiki. articles of this nature tends to add sterile links to aspects relevant to the case in question and not a glorifying gore, Reddit-like "which case is the worst" list of other cases of marked cruelty. (I am not saying that is your intention btw. Also, the Furuta case is not on my watchlist). These cases aren't even similar or related to the Likens case beyond levels of sadism. They have nothing to do with this case. A 1996 case of a British girl having her eyes gouged out and bound to a radiator in Manchester has nothing to do with a 1965 case in Indiana. I mean, perhaps a referenced mention of the Capper or Likens case on the Wiki. herd mentality ↗ section would be warranted?

If they stay, mark my words, within weeks or months, more and more cases of "which case in your opinion causes the worst nightmares" will be added. Of course if consensus goes against me that is fine. Kieronoldham (talk) 23:12, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

:Did not expect you to leave a message. Well I appreciate it.
:Its nothing like that honestly. I'm not one of those “Oh this one is the worst or this and that” I just added on to case’s that were already there before. Its a more of see also similar murders and cases like this one. It’s not a competition at all and Im not one of those people who make tik tok edits.
:But you are wrong (Not trying to be mean ) when you say the cases aren’t similar in nature at all. Sylvia Likens, Junko Furuta, and Suzanne Capper are very similar cases despite happening in three different countries and decades. All girls were tortured by a group of individuals who repeatedly tortured them and mentally abused them. Sylvia and Junko were also abused and I think sexually assaulted by other people brought in by their captors (The neighbors for Sylvia and The captors friends for Junko.) It didn’t happen with Suzanne though, with only one person who came in but was afraid to free her. They also severely disfigured all girls and set fire to Junko and Suzanne. All three cases showed America, Britian, and Japan, the depravity and senseless nature of the girls deaths. Thats why I grouped them together from the small bits others left.
:I don’t think so honestly. Its just cases similar in nature and not comparisons like “this one is worst.” ButteyFelicity (talk) 23:35, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
::You are welcome. Sorry I didn't reply earlier I wasn't pinged.

::When you say you didn't expect a message from me I am sorry I did not leave one here the 1st time around (many times other editors have not done do so with me on these articles over the years regarding reversions or edit summaries).

::This topic is ''not'' a palatable one even by the standards of true crime, so sometimes it does not keep/put you in the best mindset to engage with others on a "general chat" basis, or to delve deep into the mindset of a sickening case and then to briefly "jump out of it" to talk with others about what you want to put back in the sealed annex of your mind again when the time is right. That is a major reason why a lot of the time I do not talk on others' pages (not that >95% do with me either). Hope that makes sense.

::I didn't think you were of the mindset of "compare this case to that on", or that your intentions were even in remotely in that direction - it is just what others may potentially wish to see as valid to add to this case if cases get added. There are lists like this one ↗ of certain cases on Wiki. If there was a list of cases of the nature you have referenced that would be a collective list of these cases that could be added? All the best on here.--Kieronoldham (talk) 01:39, 21 April 2026 (UTC)
:::No no its just that I didn’t expect anyone to chat with me reasonably on here. Most have been sorta “mean” and biased.
:::so your saying that you don’t like messaging others about these sensitive topics and than chat regularly if im correct? That is understandable. Have most been well “grifters”?
:::I don’t think that will happen honestly. I get your concern like you thought i was making a list of torture cases underneath hers. I just added those cases since they were in the see also section. I could remove Kelly Bates since the three cases I talked about involved like a “Mob” than one killer.
:::mainly they were in see also since I see them compared a lot and that they are cited to have same circumstances. ButteyFelicity (talk) 01:48, 21 April 2026 (UTC)
::::I have been on here 17 years - come November it'll have been eighteen years. No - believe me I am happy to chat and help/assist others on this topic or generally finding citations, creating infoboxes etc. but I detect the topic matter in question here puts people off talking with me (which I can understand). Then again, as the years go by '''trust me''' you will recognize other account names and what they devote time and focus to so can understand how preoccupied he/she/they are even if you get the occasional flyby revert of something you have added or adjusted... Can be off-putting at first but believe me you get to expect and (90% of the time at least) understand it. :)

::::I can't speak for others, but my experiences on here have largely been positive. Quite possibly one or two may have had ulterior motives in interacting with me over the years (chances are that may be true) but the vast, vast majority haven't I believe. I assure you I did not think you were making a list of cases of that nature. Maybe referencing Reddit was the incorrect example, but it only takes the wrong person (or editor) to see Reddit's discussion forums as something Wiki. should emulate. Happy to help here and there if I can.--Kieronoldham (talk) 02:13, 21 April 2026 (UTC)
:::::Oh that would be nice actually. Topic matter of true crime? I’ve been having trouble making articles or finding reliable articles for them. I try to make it unbiased and more resourceful if you get what I mean. And i understand that. A lot has been undone by others.
:::::No, no that’s completely fine. Considering there are some crazies from true crime, its completely understandable. ButteyFelicity (talk) 03:41, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on Killing of Renée Good ↗


25px|alt=|link= ↗ Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have '''automatically detected''' that this edit ↗ performed by you, on the page :Killing of Renée Good ↗, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive ↗, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/Botpreload&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/Boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%20ButteyFelicity&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d={{FULLPAGENAMEE:Killing of Renée Good}}&preloadparams%5b%5d=1351439138 report it to my operator].
Thanks, <!-- User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/inform -->Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 23:56, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on List of murdered American children ↗


25px|alt=|link= ↗ Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have '''automatically detected''' that this edit ↗ performed by you, on the page :List of murdered American children ↗, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive ↗, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/Botpreload&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/Boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%20ButteyFelicity&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d={{FULLPAGENAMEE:List of murdered American children}}&preloadparams%5b%5d=1351904111 report it to my operator].
Thanks, <!-- User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/inform -->Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 21:24, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

May 2026



30px|link=|alt=Copyright problem icon ↗ Your edit to :Pleasant Garden, North Carolina ↗ 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 {{em|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 {{em|information}}, but not as a source of {{em|content}}, such as sentences or images&mdash;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. <!-- Template:uw-copyright --> <span style="color: purple">Sophisticatedevening</span><sup><span style="color: purple">(talk)</span></sup> 03:08, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

:Oh sorry about that, I will right in my own words and re-add it. Most of it was in my own words except that part. I apologize for it. ButteyFelicity (talk) 12:52, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

May 2026



Hi ButteyFelicity,
I see that you’re a new editor, we’re very happy to have you here. Have you had a chance to look at WP:RSP ↗ yet or has it been mentioned before? Do you have any questions about how RSP works or how it’s arranged? Mikewem (talk) 23:33, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

:I am. It is also said Fox News is considered marginally reliable. CNN also confirmed a link to Good being part of it. The article needed a neutral tone and there were some things left out. ButteyFelicity (talk) 23:50, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
::No, Fox is considered is generally unreliable for the reporting of politics WP:FOXNEWSPOLITICS ↗. CNN only said this was claimed, not confirmed. O3000, Ret. (talk) 23:59, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
:::But there are other sources claiming she was part of it. Reliable sources. Washington post, and Labornotes. Even one pointing out the bias and saying she was trained to handle ice agents. At least the claiming should be in there. ButteyFelicity (talk) 00:12, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
::::You have presented no reliable sources that say she was trained to handle ice agents, whatever that means. O3000, Ret. (talk) 00:28, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

May 2026



30px|alt=Stop icon ↗ '''You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war ↗.''' This means that you are repeatedly reverting content back to how you think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree. Once it is known that there is a disagreement, users are expected to collaborate ↗ with others, avoid editing disruptively ↗, and try to reach a consensus ↗ – rather than repeatedly reverting the changes made by other users.

Important points to note:
# {{strong|Edit warring is disruptive behavior ↗ – regardless of how many reverts you have made;}}
# {{strong|Do not engage in edit warring – even if you believe that you are right.}}
You need to discuss the disagreement on the article's talk page ↗ and work towards a revision that represents consensus among everyone involved. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard ↗ or seek dispute resolution ↗ if discussions reach an impasse. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection ↗. {{strong|If you continue to engage in edit warring, you may be blocked ↗ from editing.}} <!-- Template:uw-ew -->

This is both a contentious topic WP:CTOP ↗ and a WP:BLP ↗. Please go to the talk page. O3000, Ret. (talk) 23:56, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

May 2026 III



link=|25px|alt=Information icon ↗ You have recently made edits related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. This is a standard message to inform you that post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people is a designated contentious topic. This message <em>does <strong>not</strong> imply that there are any issues with your editing</em>. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics ↗. <!-- Derived from Template:Contentious topics/alert --> O3000, Ret. (talk) 00:08, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

:Wikipedia:Neutral point of view ↗
:yet there are sources claiming this but all skimmed over.
:https://labornotes.org/2026/01/renee-good-killed-ice-was-standing-solidarity-her-neighbors#:~:text=The%2037%2Dyear%2Dold%20Renee,shortly%20before%20ICE%20murdered%20her. ↗ This is considered a reliable source.
:https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/immigration-crackdown-protest-ice-federal-agents-tear-gas/
:this claims she was also an activist. Being part of Anti-ICE. Its stated in the little bubble of targeting us citizens which says she is a activist but her family said she wasn’t. Its a bit conflicting is it? ButteyFelicity (talk) 00:22, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
::I have no idea what Labornotes is and it has never come up at RSN. The other RS sources you have presented say no such thing. I have responded on the ATP where this belongs. O3000, Ret. (talk) 00:27, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on Plymouth shooting ↗


25px|alt=|link= ↗ Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have '''automatically detected''' that this edit ↗ performed by you, on the page :Plymouth shooting ↗, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive ↗, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/Botpreload&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/Boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%20ButteyFelicity&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d={{FULLPAGENAMEE:Plymouth shooting}}&preloadparams%5b%5d=1352244366 report it to my operator].
Thanks, <!-- User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/inform -->Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 01:41, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

New message from Shearonink


25px|link=|alt= ↗&nbsp;You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Killing of Renée Good §&nbsp;Recent edits about Fed evidence being turned over to Minnesota judge ↗. <!-- Template:Please see --> Shearonink (talk) 01:52, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on Annunciation Catholic Church shooting ↗


25px|alt=|link= ↗ Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have '''automatically detected''' that this edit ↗ performed by you, on the page :Annunciation Catholic Church shooting ↗, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive ↗, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/Botpreload&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/Boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%20ButteyFelicity&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d={{FULLPAGENAMEE:Annunciation Catholic Church shooting}}&preloadparams%5b%5d=1353065268 report it to my operator].
Thanks, <!-- User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/inform -->Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 23:34, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Stop doing contentious moves without doing a formal move request



That you personally do not like Wikipedia's guidelines does not mean you can overrule community consensus on it. In titles like that we match the city. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:53, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

:Dude. I did small ones that no one cared about and haven't had much traffic. It says only do ones that don’t have a large consensus (small ones) and not huge one like Virginia Tech. Why are you following what Im doing? Thats sorta creepy. On everything I do you follow me. And what gives that I don’t like Wikipedia’s guidelines? You have been prone to argue as well with others and get heated as well. You have no right to talk. You have given me sorta snide remarks too. Im doing ones that have the commonname per guildlines. Theres also WP:COMMONSENSE ↗ and the fact people have said its been strictly followed to much. ButteyFelicity (talk) 02:39, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
::You should not be making moves against community consensus, especially if they're on pages that no one is watching. WP:NCE ↗ is the naming guideline in question and just because you do not like it does not mean it does not apply. If we're appealing to WP:COMMONSENSE ↗, it is common sense to not have vaguely named articles.
::I'm not "following you", you are simply making multiple moves in the crime topic area and there are watchlists/article/move alerts for these topics. For example, Wikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography/Article alerts ↗, for one, or Wikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography/Assessment ↗ for another, or recent changes... I comment on basically every mass shooting related RM, because it shows up in the article alerts list. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:36, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
::Quit saying I don’t like it. Your just starting something that doesn’t need to be done. Quit your accusations man. The naming guideline is taken far to strictly, a sentiment given by other users as well. I do follow it for ones that do require it- but for the ones that don’t- no. It does violate a lot of things. If were doing common sense than look here: Being too wrapped up in rules can cause a loss of perspective, so there are times when it is better to ignore a rule. Even if a contribution "violates" the precise wording of a rule, it might still be a good contribution. From your wording it doesnt appear you take it seriously and just follow the rules and make Wikipedia a newspaper. You have given snide remarks that are frankly not appreciated. Yeah but it’s frequent and I feel creeped out. Like dude your always the first one. ButteyFelicity (talk) 04:26, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
:::You’re rude. &#126;2026-30038-34 ↗ (talk) 11:35, 19 May 2026 (UTC)
::::Bro are you sock puppeting? ButteyFelicity (talk) 16:09, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

Please refrain from disruptive editing



25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive ↗ and have been or will be reverted ↗.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ↗, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges ↗. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-disruptive2 -->

In particular, please stop proposing name changes to articles. Every single time you've done so, the consensus has always been that your proposals are unproductive. It makes me (as well as PARAKANYAA and surely others) think that you're not WP:NOTHERE ↗ to build an encyclopedia. Zero Contradictions (talk) 04:32, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

:Dude. Please stop. The guy’s accusing me which isn’t nice. And your also the guy who’s comparing me with another editor who’s have sock puppet accounts, which isn't nice at all. I have been given snide remarks and rude comments. Im proposing name change articles since they don’t match the name used frequently by the media. I don’t match the NOTHERE. The only one having a problem is PARAKANYAA. If you look at the others its been nice and resolved. I came here to build an encyclopedia. I did come here to have my head bit off everytime I propose a change. I think I would like to file a complaint. ButteyFelicity (talk) 04:43, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
::Also- I don’t complain afterwards and I let it be. It says you can engage in a discussion about it with the person opposing to try and convince to change, a user has done this as well for adding years. I have read the rules but its been more adherent to the same one and ignoring the other rules. ButteyFelicity (talk) 04:49, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
::My warning was completely polite. If you're going to stop your disruptive editing, then that's all my warning was about. Zero Contradictions (talk) 05:34, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
:::I wasn’t saying your warning was rude. I was saying people have been rude to me. It seems you have been avoiding the other stuff. I haven't been disruptive. Look at my conversations with others. Im not like pagetheeditor. Now respectfully Leave me alone. I feel like your avoiding the other stuff and are just pointing fingers now. ButteyFelicity (talk) 13:26, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

ButteyFelicity and PageTheEditor are different people



I was going to post all this text in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PageTheEditor/Archive#09 May 2026 ↗, but I missed the deadline for posting it, since the discussion was archived 31 minutes before I finished writing all of it. So I'm going to post it on this page instead.

Two additional reasons for suspicion that I forgot to previously mention were:
# The WP:LOUTSOCKING ↗ done by ButteyFelicity on User talk:Zero Contradictions#Hi is reminiscent to how PageTheEditor did loutsocking on WP:Articles for deletion/Adam Lanza (2nd nomination) ↗, User talk:Ianmacm/Archive 22#DRV, and other times too.
# ButteyFelicity has a more grammatical writing style with fewer misspellings and more apostrophes in contractions on this SPI discussion vs their talk page discussions (which could suggest deliberate attempts to fake a writing style).

However, I am now convinced that ButteyFelicity and PageTheEditor are (probably) different people:

I apologize to ButteyFelicity that my observations and the SPI case that I started here have made him/her feel unwelcome on Wikipedia. However, I don't regret the observations, user comparisons, or nooticing that I made on the talk pages outside this SPI discussion, because all those observations are still true. I stand by what I said when I warned ButteyFelicity to refrain from disruptive editing on User talk:ButteyFelicity#Please refrain from disruptive editing. And if I asked ButteyFelicity to stop posting on my talk page, then ButteyFelicity should've stopped, rather than continuing to post, per WP:USERTALKSTOP ↗. It was not appropriate for ButteyFelicity to continuing posting on my talk page using temporary accounts either.

Nevertheless, I'm willing to forget these incidents and let them pass like water under the bridge. ButteyFelicity said that he/she is going to stop proposing (counterproductive) article renames, and has stopped so far. ButteyFelicity also does seem to be a genuinely new editor, so I will forgive them for their bad behavior on my talk page, as long as they don't do it again.

I'm fine with closing and archiving this SPI case. I don't have anything more to say at the moment. Zero Contradictions (talk) 09:57, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

:Oh that wasn’t me posting. I have no idea who that was. Like you said check the IP. And…I don’t know how to make another account honestly nor have I had any attentions of doing so. Me posting on your page was before all the scuttle. Though I do not appreciate the lie you made (saying you weren’t suspicious but saw the link that editor gave) Im willing to forget it. Also who is that editor? I don’t know why they’d but in to something like this. ButteyFelicity (talk) 12:27, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
::I now think ''that'' editor may be another WP:LTA ↗. I'm sorry for my accusatory tone towards you. 海盐沙冰 <sub> / aka irisChronomia / Talk</sub> 19:55, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
:::No its fine! It’s completely rational to think it was me well…because of the accusations and my demeanor. But 100% that isn’t. Apparently I think he was some dude just browsing (I think he might have also been accused to be a sockpuppet but thats due to me seeing his username there.) ButteyFelicity (talk) 20:35, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for edits on List of murdered American children ↗


I've been meaning to leave something for a bit, but thanks for your additions to the list. It helps a lot. Just ask that you make sure to read the sources you cite, and don't just reference the same source as the main article. In my experience, I run into name discrepancies often when reading about older cases, so it is good to reference different sources for confirmation too.--Wrenaissances (talk) 03:35, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

:Oh no problem! Im happy to help. Im hoping to make it the at most complete and full list. And no problem. Was there some problems on a few? If there was, do tell me since I want the article to be its best. Im thinking of their being more possible splits if I can find more. Im into lists and my autism helps a lot. Thank you for messaging. It made my day. ButteyFelicity (talk) 12:32, 13 May 2026 (UTC)
::Of course! I don't remember off the top of my head but I just fix them when I see 'em, so it's nbd. I saw you started a draft for murdered Canadian children too, and I know you tend to make some small capitalization errors, so feel free to message me if you want someone to give it a look over and make some edits for consistency. I want to eventually have a more consistent style for the American list, but that means a lot of editing and reformatting that I don't feel like doing rn. Wrenaissances (talk) 17:27, 13 May 2026 (UTC)
:::Oh thank you! Oh you saw that? I thought that could be useful to navigate if one wanted to find a particular case. Im thinking possibly doing “List of Murdered European Children” as well. Thats an appropriate term right for regions in Europe like Britain and Scotland? I think it would be better to make lists instead of categories persay since some I’ve tried adding get wonky. For the life of me I don’t know for the life of me to get it right. editors can also edit it too? Wow, did not know that. Consistent, what type particularly? Like youngest to oldest? Also Im thinking of the Murdered American Children having the 1900s, 1910s, 1920s, and 1930s being split as well soon. Im scouting around pedia’ to find more cases. I feel like this list is nice since it’s done in a user friendly way, and helps for more readers to discover cases. I’ll tell you when the decades should be split since 1900s, 1910s, and 1930s still need more cases. Oh sorry about them errors, Im a bit dyslexic- 😅 ButteyFelicity (talk) 18:00, 13 May 2026 (UTC)
::::United Kingdom would encompass both England and Scotland, as well as Wales and Northern Ireland. I want to eventually make it so the descriptions of each case is consistent, so including a short description and the sentence (or suicide/death outside of legal proceedings) for the perpetrator(s). I also think since it is a victim focused list, it might be valuable to limit how much we name the perpetrators. As for the ages, I do think youngest to oldest looks best, and it's good to do 0 ( x months) for babies since when you order the list based on age, it takes the first digit. Wrenaissances (talk) 21:20, 13 May 2026 (UTC)
:::::Oh ok. So English Children I presume would be best? Or British? And I get what you mean. And yeah It makes sense youngest to oldest. Also Still scouring for more casese, Its possible we can encompass the whole 20th century. And that there are other important Murdered American Childrenm like Christopher Snider. Hey one can edit other drafts people make? You can add stuff to the list im doing now if you like. ButteyFelicity (talk) 21:42, 13 May 2026 (UTC)
::::::British children would probably be appropriate. I would check for existing lists of people for the region and phrase it the same way, or break them down more (English children, Scottish children, etc.). And yes I can edit your draft, so I I'll pop in to make some copyedits sometime. 👍 Wrenaissances (talk) 00:36, 14 May 2026 (UTC)
:::::::Yes of course. Like Possibly add nationality or specific in the tables. And great! I’d appreciate the help. ButteyFelicity (talk) 01:19, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Your name



Hello, I just read your bio and saw that it appears you meant to name yourself "ButteryFelicity". You can read up on how to request a name change at WP:RENAME ↗ if you're interested. I myself changed my username a long time ago after someone pointed out to me that it was possible. <span style="background-color: orange;color:black;">'''<span style="color:#FFFFFF">Raskuly</span>''' 🐰</span>{{Main other|{{Ensure AAA contrast ratio|base=orange|other='''<span style="color:#FFFFFF">Raskuly</span>''' 🐰|category=Category:Pages using Template:Background color with invalid color combination ↗}}}}{{Template other|{{Ensure AAA contrast ratio|base=orange|other='''<span style="color:#FFFFFF">Raskuly</span>''' 🐰|category=Category:Pages using Template:Background color with invalid color combination ↗}}}} 23:18, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

WP:AITALK ↗



Please read WP:AITALK ↗. Joe vom Titan (talk) 16:24, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

:Huh? What did I do now? ButteyFelicity (talk) 16:28, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

Double sections



Hi, please don't make double sections for RMs, like here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Killing_of_Rafael_Ramos_and_Wenjian_Liu&diff=prev&oldid=1362710337 ↗. The Requested move template automatically makes a section name and titles it "Requested move mm dd yyyy". <span style="background-color: orange;">'''<span style="color:#FFF; margin-left:3px">Raskuly</span>''' 🐰</span> 03:30, 6 July 2026 (UTC)