Thanks for your recent edit on Tony Curtis. Just letting you know the spelling of 'synagog' was reverted to 'synagogue' as the latter is the preferred US spelling in Merriam Webster and the Cambridge American Dictionary.   Helenabella (Talk)  02:37, 1 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Ty for telling me :D 92.10.13.209 ( talk) 05:09, 1 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm FlightTime. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Jack Nicholson, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! - FlightTime ( open channel) 17:58, 10 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Jack Nicholson. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. DIVINE 📪 18:02, 10 June 2022 (UTC) reply

They're not vandalism - I used a reliable source but just fucked up the citation coding. I'm fixing it 92.10.13.209 ( talk) 18:04, 10 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Welcome to Wikipedia. Editors are expected to treat each other with respect and civility. On this encyclopedia project, editors assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not appear to do at User talk:Gprice1999. Here is Wikipedia's welcome page, and it is hoped that you will assume the good faith of other editors and continue to help us improve Wikipedia! Thank you very much! ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 23:24, 11 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Yeah sorry about that. I do usually assume good faith - like I did here on Jack Nicholson's page - Jack Nicholson - Wikipedia . But in this case I just misunderstood what gprice was doing. I have just apologised to them. 92.10.13.209 ( talk) 23:43, 11 June 2022 (UTC) reply

I've started a discussion at Talk:Ace Ventura: Pet Detective#Section heading. Erik ( talk |  contrib) ^{( ping me)} 17:43, 16 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Thank you for notifying me 92.10.13.209 ( talk) 20:01, 16 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Sorry for having rollbacked your edit! I didn't intend to do that; I must have misclicked on my watchlist and not noticed it. I don't actually have any objection to it. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 04:49, 18 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Ah, okay :) No worries! Thanks for telling me this. If you did misclick on your watchlist as you suspect, I hope u figure out what u initially intended to do! 92.10.13.209 ( talk) 04:54, 18 June 2022 (UTC) reply

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{ Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. Thanks, Mathglot ( talk) 04:57, 23 June 2022 (UTC) reply

In the last day and a half, you have three removals of the same sourced information from the lead of Conversion therapy, here, here, and here. This is inappropriate, especially because this article is under increased scrutiny based on ArbCom discretionary sanctions. Your personal feelings about the inclusion of pansexuality, as mentioned in two of your edit summaries, are irrelevant at Wikipedia (the buzzword here is " original research"); the only thing that counts, is not what we think, no matter how positive or reasonable, but rather what the reliable sources have to say about the topic. In addition, you should not be repeatedly insisting on your viewpoint of what's right in the article, rather, after the first time your edit is undone, you should discuss your differences with other editors on the Talk page of the article. Please see WP:BRD for more about this. I invite you to discuss the topic now, if you wish, at Talk:Conversion therapy to try to gain supporters for your point of view. Failing a consensus that supports your view, the status quo ante should prevail. Thanks, Mathglot ( talk) 05:34, 23 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! It appears that no one has welcomed you previously, so let me be the first to thank you for your contributions so far. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

Here are some links to pages you may find useful:

• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but if you wish to acquire additional privileges, you can simply create a named account. It's free, requires no personal information, and lets you:

• Create new pages and rename pages
• Edit semi-protected pages
• Upload images
• Have your own watchlist, which shows when articles you are interested in have changed

Note that in order for the first three features to be available, you must have had an account for a minimum number of days and made a minimum number of edits.

If you edit without using a named account, your IP address (92.10.13.209) is used to identify you instead.

I hope that you, as a Wikipedian, decide to continue contributing to our project: an encyclopedia of human knowledge that anyone can edit. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. We also have an intuitive guide on editing if you're interested. By the way, please make sure to sign and date your talk page comments with four tildes (~~~~).

Happy editing! Mathglot ( talk) 05:47, 23 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, 92.10.13.209. You have new messages at Schazjmd's talk page.
Message added 13:50, 28 June 2022 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. reply

(in lieu of ping) Schazjmd  (talk) 13:50, 28 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Hi 92.10.13.209! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Brokeback Mountain several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Brokeback Mountain, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. ZimZalaBim ^talk 19:41, 28 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Per WP:BRD and the above notice, please discuss your concerns at the article's Talk page rather than continuing to reinsert your additional material now that your edits have been disputed. Thank you. DonIago ( talk) 20:07, 28 June 2022 (UTC) reply

I haven't reinserted anything 92.10.13.209 ( talk) 20:13, 28 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Revert #1 and Revert #2. -- ZimZalaBim ^talk 20:16, 28 June 2022 (UTC) reply

I meant since you left your initial message on my talk page 92.10.13.209 ( talk) 20:17, 28 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Please don't get offended because of a joke. Fred Trump's middle name is Christ, that's all I was referring to. But sure, there are many, including the ex-president, who have hinted at connections to Hitler, whether they were referring to or participating in Reductio ad Hitlerum. Please discuss constructively, don't edit-war, or you will likely be reverted. UpdateNerd ( talk) 13:44, 29 June 2022 (UTC) reply

I wasn't 'getting offended', I just didn't understand the joke. Out of context the phrase 'heil jesús' seemed like vandalism and hate speech - even though I now know that wasn't your intention. I also thought u were edit warring with the previous editor who had excised the handlebar moustache link, even though I now know this wasn't the case. I'll self-revert now since I think your edit was a good one in retrospect, although I'd advise you not to tell people things like 'please don't get offended because of a joke' from now on. I'd recommend just explaining the joke people might have misunderstood in instances like this, so everyone's on the same page. Telling them not to get offended just adds fuel to the fire. 92.10.13.209 ( talk) 13:58, 29 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks for restoring the edit. And sorry about that "please don't get offended" statement, that was written in haste & sounds condescending in writing (as tone gets lost over the 'net). Thanks for taking the time to listen to my explanation, as that's probably the rarest thing to occur in Wiki disputes! Best, UpdateNerd ( talk) 14:06, 29 June 2022 (UTC) reply

You're welcome, and thank you for apologising :) 92.10.13.209 ( talk) 15:35, 29 June 2022 (UTC) reply

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Amanda Lear. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. ZimZalaBim ^talk 18:25, 29 June 2022 (UTC) reply

We already settled the edit war, although I'm frustrated that you left a message on only my page when I wasn't the only one engaged in the edit war 92.10.13.209 ( talk) 20:03, 29 June 2022 (UTC) reply

I have reverted this edit to Amanda Lear. That section is properly sourced and has been in the article for a while. If you'd like to make this large of a deletion, please obtain consensus on the article's talk page. -- ZimZalaBim ^talk 20:32, 6 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Please stop posting on my talk page. If other people want to post here about my concerns with the Lear page they can. But I do not wish to speak with you. 92.10.13.209 ( talk) 20:33, 6 July 2022 (UTC) reply

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:92.10.13.209 reported by User:ZimZalaBim (Result: ). Thank you. ZimZalaBim ^talk 00:28, 7 July 2022 (UTC) reply