Thanks for your efforts rewriting the Hilaire du Berrier article, and welcome to Wikipedia. Neighborhood Review ( talk) 18:29, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
If you're particularly interested in du Berrier you might like to see my update to his bibliography. Neighborhood Review ( talk) 18:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi Digital Herodotus! I noticed your contributions to Inejirō Asanuma and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
Happy editing! JesseRafe ( talk) 14:14, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Hey there, I dont know if this is the place to do it, but the edit I made was labelling the policital party in the infobox as 'NSDAP' instead of 'Nazi Party' This was changed by another user who made a claim that I was trying to "mask" that Goebbels was a nazi, and citing some supposed rule on this site that you cannot refer to the Nazi Party by their abbreviation of the full official name "NSDAP"
Hi Digital Herodotus! I noticed that you have reverted another editor several times at
Joseph Goebbels. I wanted to make sure you're aware that the
edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable. If the problem continues or you encounter a similar situation in the future, there are several ways you can seek help:
- Request a third opinion at the talk page discussion or use another method of dispute resolution.
- Warn the other editor for edit warring and request they be blocked if they persist.
- Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard.
Using these instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. —— Serial 13:44, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Robert IV of Sablé, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Anjou and Sablé. 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) 06:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello Digital Herodotus! Your additions to
Thomas D. Campbell have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the
public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a
suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see
Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) 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.
- You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
- Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
- We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
- If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
- Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.
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, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa ( talk) 14:48, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Please start using edit summaries so other editors have some idea what you are doing. Thanks. Magnolia677 ( talk) 15:06, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- At
Andrews, Texas, you left the edit summary, "added named for segment to infobox as well as cleaned up infobox". What "segment" did you add a name to? Thank you.
Magnolia677 (
talk) 15:41, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- the infobox, there is a "named for" segment in infoboxes for places. Digital Herodotus ( talk) 15:44, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
Quit introducing anachronisms to James Longstreet. The Louisiana National Guard did not officially exist until after Longstreet was dead, so there is no reason to continue to link to an organization that didn't exist during the events referenced. Hog Farm Talk 16:13, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
The National Guard for each state was originally referred to as the State Militias, with some dating their foundation to early colonial times. The Louisiana National Guard does so and traces its origins to the 1600s. They also trace their legacy to participation in Reconstruction error skirmishes, the the battle of Liberty Palace which Longstreet fought in.
https://geauxguard.la.gov/history/
Digital Herodotus ( talk) 16:31, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John Gordon (militia captain), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Pensacola.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:07, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
GenQuest. An edit that you recently made to
Battle of Alamance and others; seemed to be a test and has been
reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your
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!
GenQuest
"scribble" 18:18, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Eugene Waggaman (July 19)
- Draft:Eugene Waggaman may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
|
Hello, Digital Herodotus!
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! -
Rich
T|
C|
E-Mail 14:14, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
|
One of your recent edits 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 are the copyright holder, please read
Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—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.
Drm310 🍁 (
talk) 15:05, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing.
- If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
- If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Khaddi Sagnia, you may be blocked from editing. Still copyright issues with your editing, the image you added has been removed as a copyright violation. TylerBurden ( talk) 22:50, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war. 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:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
- 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. Paul August ☎ 13:40, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Gaius Marius shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Avilich ( talk) 18:39, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Eugene Waggaman
Hello, Digital Herodotus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
Draft:Eugene Waggaman, 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) 19:01, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
There is a consensus that coats of arms shouldn't be used as substitutes for national flags: see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons/Archive 16#Close the coats-of-arms loophole. I don't feel particularly strongly about it myself, but it is an issue that has been discussed extensively. Choess ( talk) 18:31, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
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 post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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.
— Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 13:09, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Please do not
attack other editors, as you did at
Talk:Alejandra Caraballo. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please
stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. —
Sangdeboeuf (
talk) 13:09, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
- DH, I'll just add that referring to good-faith edits as "vandalism" counts as a personal attack. There's plenty of room to disagree about the value of an edit without assuming bad faith.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs) 16:39, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
- @
Firefangledfeathers@
Firefangledfeathers also lack of good faith
Talk:Antifa (United States) about an hour ago.
Doug Weller
talk 18:34, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- Looking through their contributions I see a lot of problems with their interactions with other editors. Latest example is today at
User talk:HandThatFeeds.
Doug Weller
talk 18:43, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- @ Sangdeboeuf meant to ping you as well. Doug Weller talk 18:44, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- Looking through their contributions I see a lot of problems with their interactions with other editors. Latest example is today at
User talk:HandThatFeeds.
Doug Weller
talk 18:43, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- @
Firefangledfeathers@
Firefangledfeathers also lack of good faith
Talk:Antifa (United States) about an hour ago.
Doug Weller
talk 18:34, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
Please stop adding unreferenced or
poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at
Alejandra Caraballo. Content of this nature could be regarded as
defamatory and is in violation of
Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be
blocked from editing Wikipedia.
"falsely claim" can imply a willful, knowing act of deceit. The sources don't use the phrase, and other editors have already objected to the phrase. I think you acted in good faith, but urge you take these things to the talk page. If you feel there is good reason to change "suggested" to "falsely claimed," then you should start a new topic on the talk page for that. Sativa Inflorescence ( talk) 18:28, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you for
your contributions to
Wikipedia. I noticed that one or more recent edit(s) you made did not have an
edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be
quite brief.
The edit summary field looks like this:
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a
Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting
Preferences →
Editing → 
Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button.
Thanks! .
This is an example edit that could have used an explanation. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 19:00, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
In talk page discussions, indentation helps readers (and screen readers) properly follow the conversation. Short version: indent your reply one level more than the comment that you are replying to. Detailed version: Help:Talk_pages#Indentation. Thanks! Schazjmd (talk) 21:58, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- test Digital Herodotus ( talk) 21:59, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- test Digital Herodotus ( talk) 22:00, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.
Bishonen |
tålk 22:19, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Your draft article, Draft:Eugene Waggaman
Hello, Digital Herodotus. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Eugene Waggaman".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 18:52, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your efforts rewriting the Hilaire du Berrier article, and welcome to Wikipedia. Neighborhood Review ( talk) 18:29, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
If you're particularly interested in du Berrier you might like to see my update to his bibliography. Neighborhood Review ( talk) 18:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi Digital Herodotus! I noticed your contributions to Inejirō Asanuma and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
Happy editing! JesseRafe ( talk) 14:14, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Hey there, I dont know if this is the place to do it, but the edit I made was labelling the policital party in the infobox as 'NSDAP' instead of 'Nazi Party' This was changed by another user who made a claim that I was trying to "mask" that Goebbels was a nazi, and citing some supposed rule on this site that you cannot refer to the Nazi Party by their abbreviation of the full official name "NSDAP"
Hi Digital Herodotus! I noticed that you have reverted another editor several times at
Joseph Goebbels. I wanted to make sure you're aware that the
edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable. If the problem continues or you encounter a similar situation in the future, there are several ways you can seek help:
- Request a third opinion at the talk page discussion or use another method of dispute resolution.
- Warn the other editor for edit warring and request they be blocked if they persist.
- Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard.
Using these instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. —— Serial 13:44, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Robert IV of Sablé, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Anjou and Sablé. 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) 06:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello Digital Herodotus! Your additions to
Thomas D. Campbell have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the
public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a
suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see
Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) 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.
- You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
- Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
- We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
- If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
- Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.
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, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa ( talk) 14:48, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Please start using edit summaries so other editors have some idea what you are doing. Thanks. Magnolia677 ( talk) 15:06, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- At
Andrews, Texas, you left the edit summary, "added named for segment to infobox as well as cleaned up infobox". What "segment" did you add a name to? Thank you.
Magnolia677 (
talk) 15:41, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- the infobox, there is a "named for" segment in infoboxes for places. Digital Herodotus ( talk) 15:44, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
Quit introducing anachronisms to James Longstreet. The Louisiana National Guard did not officially exist until after Longstreet was dead, so there is no reason to continue to link to an organization that didn't exist during the events referenced. Hog Farm Talk 16:13, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
The National Guard for each state was originally referred to as the State Militias, with some dating their foundation to early colonial times. The Louisiana National Guard does so and traces its origins to the 1600s. They also trace their legacy to participation in Reconstruction error skirmishes, the the battle of Liberty Palace which Longstreet fought in.
https://geauxguard.la.gov/history/
Digital Herodotus ( talk) 16:31, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John Gordon (militia captain), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Pensacola.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:07, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
GenQuest. An edit that you recently made to
Battle of Alamance and others; seemed to be a test and has been
reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your
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!
GenQuest
"scribble" 18:18, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Eugene Waggaman (July 19)
- Draft:Eugene Waggaman may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
|
|
Hello, Digital Herodotus!
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! -
Rich
T|
C|
E-Mail 14:14, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
|
One of your recent edits 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 are the copyright holder, please read
Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—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.
Drm310 🍁 (
talk) 15:05, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing.
- If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
- If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Khaddi Sagnia, you may be blocked from editing. Still copyright issues with your editing, the image you added has been removed as a copyright violation. TylerBurden ( talk) 22:50, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war. 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:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
- 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. Paul August ☎ 13:40, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Gaius Marius shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Avilich ( talk) 18:39, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Eugene Waggaman
Hello, Digital Herodotus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
Draft:Eugene Waggaman, 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) 19:01, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
There is a consensus that coats of arms shouldn't be used as substitutes for national flags: see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons/Archive 16#Close the coats-of-arms loophole. I don't feel particularly strongly about it myself, but it is an issue that has been discussed extensively. Choess ( talk) 18:31, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
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 post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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.
— Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 13:09, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Please do not
attack other editors, as you did at
Talk:Alejandra Caraballo. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please
stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. —
Sangdeboeuf (
talk) 13:09, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
- DH, I'll just add that referring to good-faith edits as "vandalism" counts as a personal attack. There's plenty of room to disagree about the value of an edit without assuming bad faith.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs) 16:39, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
- @
Firefangledfeathers@
Firefangledfeathers also lack of good faith
Talk:Antifa (United States) about an hour ago.
Doug Weller
talk 18:34, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- Looking through their contributions I see a lot of problems with their interactions with other editors. Latest example is today at
User talk:HandThatFeeds.
Doug Weller
talk 18:43, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- @ Sangdeboeuf meant to ping you as well. Doug Weller talk 18:44, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- Looking through their contributions I see a lot of problems with their interactions with other editors. Latest example is today at
User talk:HandThatFeeds.
Doug Weller
talk 18:43, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- @
Firefangledfeathers@
Firefangledfeathers also lack of good faith
Talk:Antifa (United States) about an hour ago.
Doug Weller
talk 18:34, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
Please stop adding unreferenced or
poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at
Alejandra Caraballo. Content of this nature could be regarded as
defamatory and is in violation of
Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be
blocked from editing Wikipedia.
"falsely claim" can imply a willful, knowing act of deceit. The sources don't use the phrase, and other editors have already objected to the phrase. I think you acted in good faith, but urge you take these things to the talk page. If you feel there is good reason to change "suggested" to "falsely claimed," then you should start a new topic on the talk page for that. Sativa Inflorescence ( talk) 18:28, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you for
your contributions to
Wikipedia. I noticed that one or more recent edit(s) you made did not have an
edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be
quite brief.
The edit summary field looks like this:
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a
Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting
Preferences →
Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button.
Thanks! .
This is an example edit that could have used an explanation. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 19:00, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
In talk page discussions, indentation helps readers (and screen readers) properly follow the conversation. Short version: indent your reply one level more than the comment that you are replying to. Detailed version: Help:Talk_pages#Indentation. Thanks! Schazjmd (talk) 21:58, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- test Digital Herodotus ( talk) 21:59, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- test Digital Herodotus ( talk) 22:00, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.
Bishonen |
tålk 22:19, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Your draft article, Draft:Eugene Waggaman
Hello, Digital Herodotus. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Eugene Waggaman".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 18:52, 5 July 2023 (UTC)