Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to House of Windsor, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. 191.9.63.220 ( talk) 06:01, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
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. 200.173.58.121 ( talk) 15:35, 29 October 2022 (UTC) (I'm out of home).
What's the matter with you? There is clear consensus on the talk page to keep the image that was there, yet you did this again! And without even commenting in the discussion. If you are asking for trouble, that can be arranged. Please stop it! -- SergeWoodzing ( talk) 06:21, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
Ohio (meme), is not suitable as written to remain published. An article needs more information and citations from
reliable,
independent sources to remain in the
mainspace. Information that can't be referenced should be removed (
verifiability is of
central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline, has suitable content and thus is ready for mainspace, click the Submit the draft for review! button atop the article.
Silikonz
💬
01:36, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to Watson Cove, Nebraska. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it 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 your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. The person who loves reading ( talk) 01:44, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello, BillClinternet!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the
Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the
Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!
Tails
Wx
22:03, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
|
I see from your user page that you're apparently a relatively new editor, which is great news because Wikipedia can always benefit from new editors coming on board. So, first, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope that your editing here will be fun and productive.
Second, I'm reaching out to you, as a more experienced editor, to offer what I hope will be helpful advice. You recently reverted editing that I had done earlier today on the Lake City School article, but, unfortunately, you did so with an edit summary ("Vandalism based upon section removing") that was inaccurate and was also a potential violation of Wikipedia policy. Per Wikipedia's explanation of what vandalism is and is not: "On Wikipedia, vandalism has a very specific meaning: editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a free encyclopedia.... Even if misguided ... any good faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism."
I can assure you that my editing was done in good faith and, in fact, did not remove a section of the article as you indicated in your edit summary. (I had merely repositioned it to make it easier to expand the article.) Your edit summary also appeared to violate "AGF," one of Wikipedia's most important behaviors: "Assuming good faith (AGF) is a fundamental principle on Wikipedia. It is the assumption that editors' edits and comments are made in good faith – that is, the assumption that people are not deliberately trying to hurt Wikipedia, even when their actions are harmful. Most people try to help the project, not hurt it." And that was, quite, simply, what I was trying to do with my edits to the Lake City School article (help the project, not hurt it). So, I ask that, moving forward, you be more cautious before labeling edits made by more experienced editors as vandalism and, perhaps, try reaching out to those editors through the talk pages of the articles you're working on, or via their talk pages. I hope this advice helps. Again, I wish you great success with your editing. Kind Regards. - 47thPennVols ( talk) 01:46, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Hey there Bill. I noticed your discussion with that Danish IP address, and wanted to refer you to Wikipedia:Deny recognition. People who truly want to vandalise, or just will not cooperate, shouldn't be given the fuel, especially post-block. I would recommend letting the facts speak for themselves. A discrete report to AIV is almost always better than a 2kB talk page arguement ;) Schminnte ( talk • contribs) 14:56, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
Birchard Austin Hayes, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs to include citations from
reliable,
independent sources. (
?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (
verifiability is of
central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.
Waddles
🗩
🖉
22:57, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
Since you recently participated in the Charles III requested move discussion, I thought you might like to know that there are two other discussions currently going on about other British monarch article titles here and here. Cheers. Rreagan007 ( talk) 22:21, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Please see the Talk page for the article on Jane Grey for my response to the image and caption that you recently posted. DesertSkies120 ( talk) 01:29, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Throne, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Queen. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 05:54, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello, BillClinternet. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Watson Cove, Nebraska, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 02:02, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello, BillClinternet. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ohio (meme), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 23:01, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a Request Move discussion about William IV. Since you participated in the previous move discussion involving William IV, I thought you might want to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 ( talk) 19:37, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Per MOS:ICON, infoboxes should not contain decorative icons such as coronets. DrKay ( talk) 19:56, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello BillClinternet! While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. DrKay ( talk) 06:49, 24 September 2023 (UTC)