Hello, I'm SouthernKangaroo. An edit that you recently made to Jughead Jones seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want to practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! ∞ southernkangaroo ∞ talk∞ 17:22, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Jughead Jones. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Dat Good Dude342 17:27, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at
Archie Andrews, you may be
blocked from editing.
Your edits have been automatically marked as
vandalism and have been automatically
reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism:
Archie Andrews was
changed by
85.238.101.64
(u)
(t) ANN scored at 0.884973 on 2019-09-26T17:31:28+00:00
Thank you. ClueBot NG ( talk) 17:31, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Archie Andrews. Invalid OS ( talk) 17:36, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
firefly (
t ·
c ) 16:40, 1 April 2022 (UTC)85.238.101.64 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
No clear reason provided 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 16:42, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
Decline reason:
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Hello, I'm Riverbend21. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Keith Urban have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Riverbend21 ( talk) 12:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Vehicle frame. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Raydann ( talk) 12:41, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Riverbend21, yep, that one was obviously wrongful, thanks. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 12:45, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Lolkikmoddi ( talk) 13:56, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Lolkikmoddi where do you see vandalism here? 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 13:58, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Muboshgu: Can you please join current conversation and make a clear understanding for those numerous power users, who abuse me for more then half an year for same activity, that you marked as correct here? Thank you in advance. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 14:24, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
@ PerpetuityGrat: Can you please also join current conversation and make a clear understanding for those numerous power users, who abuse me for more then half an year for same activity, that you marked as correct i.e. here or here? Thank you in advance. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 14:43, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
@ JrawX: Can you please also join current conversation and make a clear understanding for those numerous power users, who abuse me for more then half an year for same activity of deleting emails from articles, that you partly duplicated here? Thank you in advance. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 14:50, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Ira Leviton: Can you please also join current conversation and make a clear understanding for those numerous power users, who abuse me for more then half an year for same activity of deleting emails from articles, that you partly duplicated i.e. here or here? Thank you in advance. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 14:59, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
@ GoingBatty:Can you please tell why did you delete direct email address? Your voice would be useful for current conversation. Thank you in advance. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 01:29, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Anomalocaris:Please tell us here why do you think deleting email from cite template is a good idea. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 02:20, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
{{
Cite news}}
template. That edit included about 400 to 500 small individual changes, and I stand behind each and every one of them. The part that seems to concern you is:
{{Cite news|url=http://www.wacotrib.com/news/politics/students-bring-passionate-speeches-to-march-for-our-lives-rally/article_b33e5795-195f-5307-a4ae-e046e8e1deb5.html|title=Students bring passionate speeches to March for Our Lives rally|last=jbsmith@wacotrib.com|first=J.B. SMITH|work=WacoTrib.com|access-date=2018-03-28}}
: jbsmith@wacotrib.com, J.B. SMITH.
"Students bring passionate speeches to March for Our Lives rally". WacoTrib.com. Retrieved 2018-03-28.{{Cite news|url=http://www.wacotrib.com/news/politics/students-bring-passionate-speeches-to-march-for-our-lives-rally/article_b33e5795-195f-5307-a4ae-e046e8e1deb5.html|title=Students bring passionate speeches to March for Our Lives rally |author=J.B. Smith |work=Waco Tribune |access-date=2018-03-28}}
: J.B. Smith.
"Students bring passionate speeches to March for Our Lives rally". Waco Tribune. Retrieved 2018-03-28.|last=
parameter is supposed to be a last name; the |first=
parameter is supposed to be a first name; neither parameter is supposed to have anything else (such as an e-mail address) and neither parameter is supposed to be in ALL CAPS. Since the first and last names already appeared together in one parameter, I elected to keep it that way and used the |author=
parameter. If someone else came long and separated the first and last names into separate parameters, I would not object, but I did nothing wrong. If you want to be a better editor, I encourage you to look further at this particular edit and any other edit in my editing history. I take pride in my edits and in writing clear and comprehensive edit summaries. In this case, with over 400 individual changes, the summary didn't detail everything, but everything I did was for a reason. The California city is "Benicia" not "Benecia". {{
Cite news}}
is preferred to {{
Cite web}}
when either is possible and the material is the work of a bona fide news organization. A few editors disagree, but I strongly believe that television stations should be considered publishers and not works, i.e. they should not be italicized. The hyphen (-) should be replaced with an en dash (–) to indicate a range. When used to indicate a range, the en dash should be spaced if and only if one of the items it appears between is a compound. Whenever possible, use the name of the publication or publisher, not its website, thus "ctmirror.org" should be replaced with "The Connecticut Mirror". Items posted on social media websites such as Facebook should be listed with the social media appearing in the |via=
parameter: |via=Facebook
. Puffery should be removed from publishers or periodicals, thus |work=WPSD Local 6 - Your News, Weather, & Sports Authority
becomes |publisher=WPSD
. There are various standard ways of indicating elements of state, party, and district number of a member of the U.S. House of Representatives; "U.S. Rep.
Steny Hoyer, D-5, of Maryland" is not in a proper format, so I fixed it to "U.S. Rep.
Steny Hoyer (D-MD-5)". Piped links can be appropriate, but it is not appropriate to use a city link with the mayor of that city, so I fixed "Ardsley Mayor
Nancy Kaboolian" to "
Ardsley Mayor Nancy Kaboolian". Mouse over that to see that before I fixed it, clicking on the mayor's name sent you to the city she's mayor of. Others may disagree, but I believe that when a website's name isn't available except in URL style, like something.com, it's usually best to omit any leading www. So, again, thank you for asking, now go and study my edits and my edit summary methods. For edit summaries, too much detail is better than too little. The great majority of Wikipedia article edits have edit summaries that are too short. Cheers! —
Anomalocaris (
talk) 06:39, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Schazjmd: Please share why do you think deleting emails and full website url from "cite" template is a good idea. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 03:21, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Alextheconservative: Thank you for your fix. Can you please share in detail why you commented edit with "citation error" as one as deleted email here? That would be helpful for current duscusssion. Thanks 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 12:22, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
@ C.Fred:Please share why you think deleting email from cite template is fixing it. That just a question, your answer to will be helpful for current duscusssion. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 12:39, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at The Spitting Image. 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. Beccaynr ( talk) 03:46, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Do be a touch more careful with your removals; this is the actual name of the website and this one either needs its grammar fixed or as I've initially started from, a simple reversion as the email was published in the source attached to the address. (You could sell me on removal of the second one but not without some actual rationale.) -- Izno ( talk) 04:27, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Valjean:you can join discussion instead of wowing somewhere. 85.238.103.38 ( talk) 05:38, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
You're going through the edits of User:Cutlass, and reversing them all. Why are you doing that? BlueNoise ( talk) 12:53, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
@ BlueNoise:, First, not all, but certain. Second, because he's just a faulty sword-wielding idiot, who doesn't follow the Wikimedia/Wikipedia rules. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 13:06, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing.
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Pontchartrain Hotel, you may be blocked from editing. BlueNoise ( talk) 12:58, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
@ BlueNoise:, no way, it's not disruptive at all. Detailed here: User talk:85.238.106.27#Cites, so - I obviously WILL contunue 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 13:06, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
@ BlueNoise:, forgot to write your name, please read above. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 13:09, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. BlueNoise ( talk) 13:10, 3 October 2022 (UTC) @ BlueNoise:, if your same way blind as above mentioned one, - be my guest ) 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 13:11, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi, IP 85. I've looked through the edits you've been making, and I see that a lot of what you're doing is constructive, but it's also bringing you into conflict with other users. It struck me that perhaps some of that could be avoided if you did a bit more than just removing the email addresses. You're citing "NOTYELLOW", but that's not really the issue here; I doubt any of these e-mail addresses were intentionally added by editors trying to disseminate journalists' contact information. Rather, these are all likely cases of various scripts and tools treating an email address in the author field as a surname rather than an unrelated piece of metadata. So, have you considered with, say, an edit like
Special:Diff/1113846380, instead of just removing that email address, also correcting the |first=
and |last=
fields? In this case that would be just removing them or setting |author=<!--not stated-->
. Or in a case like
Special:Diff/1113840575 it would mean changing it to |last1=Thierry-Mieg
|first1=Danielle
|last2=Thierry-Mieg
|first2=Jean
. Changes like that, which show more involvement in improving the individual article and a greater understanding of the issue at hand, are much less likely to cause conflict in my experience. --
Tamzin
cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 17:22, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia's purpose is to benefit readers by acting as a widely accessible and free encyclopedia that contains information on all branches of knowledge.This is from Wikipedia:About. When you introduce or reintroduce inaccurate citation data and, in the process, hide error messages that draw helpful editors to fix such inaccurate data, that detracts from our mission to provide verifiable information to the world. Please stop. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 21:08, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
To remain, the content... must conform with Wikipedia's policies, one of which where told what Wikipedia is NOT clearly tell us i.e. "Nor should listings such as the white or yellow pages be replicated.", "not the telephone number or street address", "Listings to be avoided include, but are not limited to: ...contact information" which usually means at least both phone numbers and emails, however sometimes even street addresses to NOT REMAIN at articles of Wikipedia at any case. And that's the POLICY that is result of WHOLE community consensus that obviously overrides consensus some alone editor's opinion or consensus of couple of ones (that, in fact just your policy-groundless complaints). Sure, you can complain to Wikipedia:Arbitration who really can override community consensus however until there's no such arbtrary decision was taken that's YOU who violates Wikipedia policies by reverting my edits and not me doing it. So please, YOU stop. As of 'benefiting readers' (and not editors) - overwhelming majority of them are not interested much what order have information published a citation, will it be i.e. "By, John Grass" ("last"=By, first="John Grass") or "Grass, John" (last="Grass", first="John"), but if you are perefctonist who want to fix this - you are free to, however who I telling it ti? Guy who DIDN'T FIX ANY OF complained articles or more then half an year... So maybe you really just don't care about 'reader's benefits" and just won't pretend to be an expression of concern justifying your inappropriate activity by "just reverting everything" you don't even care about?? Does my idea clear enough for you now? 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 12:28, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
This is the
discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's
IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may
create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users.
Registering also hides your IP address. |
Hello, I'm SouthernKangaroo. An edit that you recently made to Jughead Jones seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want to practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! ∞ southernkangaroo ∞ talk∞ 17:22, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Jughead Jones. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Dat Good Dude342 17:27, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at
Archie Andrews, you may be
blocked from editing.
Your edits have been automatically marked as
vandalism and have been automatically
reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism:
Archie Andrews was
changed by
85.238.101.64
(u)
(t) ANN scored at 0.884973 on 2019-09-26T17:31:28+00:00
Thank you. ClueBot NG ( talk) 17:31, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Archie Andrews. Invalid OS ( talk) 17:36, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
firefly (
t ·
c ) 16:40, 1 April 2022 (UTC)85.238.101.64 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
No clear reason provided 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 16:42, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
Decline reason:
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Hello, I'm Riverbend21. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Keith Urban have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Riverbend21 ( talk) 12:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Vehicle frame. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Raydann ( talk) 12:41, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Riverbend21, yep, that one was obviously wrongful, thanks. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 12:45, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Lolkikmoddi ( talk) 13:56, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Lolkikmoddi where do you see vandalism here? 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 13:58, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Muboshgu: Can you please join current conversation and make a clear understanding for those numerous power users, who abuse me for more then half an year for same activity, that you marked as correct here? Thank you in advance. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 14:24, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
@ PerpetuityGrat: Can you please also join current conversation and make a clear understanding for those numerous power users, who abuse me for more then half an year for same activity, that you marked as correct i.e. here or here? Thank you in advance. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 14:43, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
@ JrawX: Can you please also join current conversation and make a clear understanding for those numerous power users, who abuse me for more then half an year for same activity of deleting emails from articles, that you partly duplicated here? Thank you in advance. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 14:50, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Ira Leviton: Can you please also join current conversation and make a clear understanding for those numerous power users, who abuse me for more then half an year for same activity of deleting emails from articles, that you partly duplicated i.e. here or here? Thank you in advance. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 14:59, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
@ GoingBatty:Can you please tell why did you delete direct email address? Your voice would be useful for current conversation. Thank you in advance. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 01:29, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Anomalocaris:Please tell us here why do you think deleting email from cite template is a good idea. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 02:20, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
{{
Cite news}}
template. That edit included about 400 to 500 small individual changes, and I stand behind each and every one of them. The part that seems to concern you is:
{{Cite news|url=http://www.wacotrib.com/news/politics/students-bring-passionate-speeches-to-march-for-our-lives-rally/article_b33e5795-195f-5307-a4ae-e046e8e1deb5.html|title=Students bring passionate speeches to March for Our Lives rally|last=jbsmith@wacotrib.com|first=J.B. SMITH|work=WacoTrib.com|access-date=2018-03-28}}
: jbsmith@wacotrib.com, J.B. SMITH.
"Students bring passionate speeches to March for Our Lives rally". WacoTrib.com. Retrieved 2018-03-28.{{Cite news|url=http://www.wacotrib.com/news/politics/students-bring-passionate-speeches-to-march-for-our-lives-rally/article_b33e5795-195f-5307-a4ae-e046e8e1deb5.html|title=Students bring passionate speeches to March for Our Lives rally |author=J.B. Smith |work=Waco Tribune |access-date=2018-03-28}}
: J.B. Smith.
"Students bring passionate speeches to March for Our Lives rally". Waco Tribune. Retrieved 2018-03-28.|last=
parameter is supposed to be a last name; the |first=
parameter is supposed to be a first name; neither parameter is supposed to have anything else (such as an e-mail address) and neither parameter is supposed to be in ALL CAPS. Since the first and last names already appeared together in one parameter, I elected to keep it that way and used the |author=
parameter. If someone else came long and separated the first and last names into separate parameters, I would not object, but I did nothing wrong. If you want to be a better editor, I encourage you to look further at this particular edit and any other edit in my editing history. I take pride in my edits and in writing clear and comprehensive edit summaries. In this case, with over 400 individual changes, the summary didn't detail everything, but everything I did was for a reason. The California city is "Benicia" not "Benecia". {{
Cite news}}
is preferred to {{
Cite web}}
when either is possible and the material is the work of a bona fide news organization. A few editors disagree, but I strongly believe that television stations should be considered publishers and not works, i.e. they should not be italicized. The hyphen (-) should be replaced with an en dash (–) to indicate a range. When used to indicate a range, the en dash should be spaced if and only if one of the items it appears between is a compound. Whenever possible, use the name of the publication or publisher, not its website, thus "ctmirror.org" should be replaced with "The Connecticut Mirror". Items posted on social media websites such as Facebook should be listed with the social media appearing in the |via=
parameter: |via=Facebook
. Puffery should be removed from publishers or periodicals, thus |work=WPSD Local 6 - Your News, Weather, & Sports Authority
becomes |publisher=WPSD
. There are various standard ways of indicating elements of state, party, and district number of a member of the U.S. House of Representatives; "U.S. Rep.
Steny Hoyer, D-5, of Maryland" is not in a proper format, so I fixed it to "U.S. Rep.
Steny Hoyer (D-MD-5)". Piped links can be appropriate, but it is not appropriate to use a city link with the mayor of that city, so I fixed "Ardsley Mayor
Nancy Kaboolian" to "
Ardsley Mayor Nancy Kaboolian". Mouse over that to see that before I fixed it, clicking on the mayor's name sent you to the city she's mayor of. Others may disagree, but I believe that when a website's name isn't available except in URL style, like something.com, it's usually best to omit any leading www. So, again, thank you for asking, now go and study my edits and my edit summary methods. For edit summaries, too much detail is better than too little. The great majority of Wikipedia article edits have edit summaries that are too short. Cheers! —
Anomalocaris (
talk) 06:39, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Schazjmd: Please share why do you think deleting emails and full website url from "cite" template is a good idea. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 03:21, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Alextheconservative: Thank you for your fix. Can you please share in detail why you commented edit with "citation error" as one as deleted email here? That would be helpful for current duscusssion. Thanks 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 12:22, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
@ C.Fred:Please share why you think deleting email from cite template is fixing it. That just a question, your answer to will be helpful for current duscusssion. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 12:39, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at The Spitting Image. 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. Beccaynr ( talk) 03:46, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Do be a touch more careful with your removals; this is the actual name of the website and this one either needs its grammar fixed or as I've initially started from, a simple reversion as the email was published in the source attached to the address. (You could sell me on removal of the second one but not without some actual rationale.) -- Izno ( talk) 04:27, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Valjean:you can join discussion instead of wowing somewhere. 85.238.103.38 ( talk) 05:38, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
You're going through the edits of User:Cutlass, and reversing them all. Why are you doing that? BlueNoise ( talk) 12:53, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
@ BlueNoise:, First, not all, but certain. Second, because he's just a faulty sword-wielding idiot, who doesn't follow the Wikimedia/Wikipedia rules. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 13:06, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing.
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Pontchartrain Hotel, you may be blocked from editing. BlueNoise ( talk) 12:58, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
@ BlueNoise:, no way, it's not disruptive at all. Detailed here: User talk:85.238.106.27#Cites, so - I obviously WILL contunue 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 13:06, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
@ BlueNoise:, forgot to write your name, please read above. 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 13:09, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. BlueNoise ( talk) 13:10, 3 October 2022 (UTC) @ BlueNoise:, if your same way blind as above mentioned one, - be my guest ) 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 13:11, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi, IP 85. I've looked through the edits you've been making, and I see that a lot of what you're doing is constructive, but it's also bringing you into conflict with other users. It struck me that perhaps some of that could be avoided if you did a bit more than just removing the email addresses. You're citing "NOTYELLOW", but that's not really the issue here; I doubt any of these e-mail addresses were intentionally added by editors trying to disseminate journalists' contact information. Rather, these are all likely cases of various scripts and tools treating an email address in the author field as a surname rather than an unrelated piece of metadata. So, have you considered with, say, an edit like
Special:Diff/1113846380, instead of just removing that email address, also correcting the |first=
and |last=
fields? In this case that would be just removing them or setting |author=<!--not stated-->
. Or in a case like
Special:Diff/1113840575 it would mean changing it to |last1=Thierry-Mieg
|first1=Danielle
|last2=Thierry-Mieg
|first2=Jean
. Changes like that, which show more involvement in improving the individual article and a greater understanding of the issue at hand, are much less likely to cause conflict in my experience. --
Tamzin
cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 17:22, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia's purpose is to benefit readers by acting as a widely accessible and free encyclopedia that contains information on all branches of knowledge.This is from Wikipedia:About. When you introduce or reintroduce inaccurate citation data and, in the process, hide error messages that draw helpful editors to fix such inaccurate data, that detracts from our mission to provide verifiable information to the world. Please stop. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 21:08, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
To remain, the content... must conform with Wikipedia's policies, one of which where told what Wikipedia is NOT clearly tell us i.e. "Nor should listings such as the white or yellow pages be replicated.", "not the telephone number or street address", "Listings to be avoided include, but are not limited to: ...contact information" which usually means at least both phone numbers and emails, however sometimes even street addresses to NOT REMAIN at articles of Wikipedia at any case. And that's the POLICY that is result of WHOLE community consensus that obviously overrides consensus some alone editor's opinion or consensus of couple of ones (that, in fact just your policy-groundless complaints). Sure, you can complain to Wikipedia:Arbitration who really can override community consensus however until there's no such arbtrary decision was taken that's YOU who violates Wikipedia policies by reverting my edits and not me doing it. So please, YOU stop. As of 'benefiting readers' (and not editors) - overwhelming majority of them are not interested much what order have information published a citation, will it be i.e. "By, John Grass" ("last"=By, first="John Grass") or "Grass, John" (last="Grass", first="John"), but if you are perefctonist who want to fix this - you are free to, however who I telling it ti? Guy who DIDN'T FIX ANY OF complained articles or more then half an year... So maybe you really just don't care about 'reader's benefits" and just won't pretend to be an expression of concern justifying your inappropriate activity by "just reverting everything" you don't even care about?? Does my idea clear enough for you now? 85.238.101.64 ( talk) 12:28, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
This is the
discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's
IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may
create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users.
Registering also hides your IP address. |