This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hey Serge. The editor LaFuerzaReina registered late last month and has already received a block for adding unsourced content. They have created articles for three barely notable songs by Ally Brooke, and edit warred on Ally Brooke discography, after which they were blocked. They have created several unsourced hoaxes, including that Ariana Grande will feature on a remix of one of Brooke's songs, "Tequila", and now two hoax drafts in the space of a few hours: Draft:Pa Mis Muchachas (album) and Draft:Strip Love, neither of which have sources confirming the album's titles. This editor is getting to be a significant problem and I'm not sure they're here for the right reasons. The unsourced content they've added is already way too numerous for me to monitor, and it has recurred even after their block, as they have reinserted the unsourced mentions after I removed them: [1], [2], [3]. @ AshMusique: has already had a couple of problems with this editor as well. Ss 112 20:23, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Gave them a final warning. Sergecross73 msg me 15:47, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Update: They we're blocked as a sock. Sergecross73 msg me 12:50, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Hey Serge. I reverted another editor on Panic! at the Disco discography, and the editor Rafinha 19 reverted me without a reason (also disregarding BRD), and then wrote a little screed on their user page about how they're "here to defeat user Ss112 and his edites" (sic) because "he thinks he owns wikipdia" (sic). Would you be able to remove this and tell Rafinha 19 this isn't okay, and to not revert users without a reason? I haven't had any interaction with this editor (nor they with me, to the best of my knowledge) in something like two years, when I warned them for last adding unsourced information to another discography. Don't know what their deal is or where this came from, but I get the feeling they're not going to listen to my warning about not reverting editors without a reason or any request from me to take it off their user page. Ss 112 17:23, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Deleted, warned. Sergecross73 msg me 18:04, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

As a fellow administrator who has had prior dealings with User:SirZPthundergod9001, I was wondering if you could review a question posted on my UserTalk page by User:40.133.234.46 regarding "spurious redirects" supposedly created by User:SirZPthundergod9001. User:40.133.234.46 has expressed a concern about addressing this question directly with User:SirZPthundergod9001, and I have reviewed their recent edit histories and I have not seen any obvious evidence of spurious redirects, but I would like a second opinion before I dismiss the question.-- TommyBoy ( talk) 03:41, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, no problem, I'll do some digging into it in a bit. Sergecross73 msg me 11:05, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your assistance. please let me know if you have any questions or need any further information from me regarding this matter.-- TommyBoy ( talk) 03:36, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Following up on my previous comments, User:40.133.234.46 has withdraw their comments regarding this question from my UserTalk page, but they are still in the page history for your review if any further action regarding this question is needed.-- TommyBoy ( talk) 22:42, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I looked into it. I think we should keep an eye on SirZP, but I'm not sure anything else in in store right now beyond that. He makes mistakes but I think it's in good faith. Sergecross73 msg me 23:05, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing this matter. Quite frankly, I am not above making mistakes while editing Wikipedia, but I think this question could have been easily resolved if User:40.133.234.46 posted it on the affected article or redirect Talk pages, or tried to resolve the issue with User:SirZPthundergod9001 first.-- TommyBoy ( talk) 00:44, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Our favourite editor is now known as Writer71809. Certes ( talk) 12:04, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Blocked. Thank you! Sergecross73 msg me 13:27, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi! I totally respect and understand the fact that you have been an admin on Wikipedia for this long and is most likely why my edits have been reverted so quickly (since I just joined). I will no longer be editing on Wikipedia since I just wanted to test out some minor edits. I really just came to see why my edits were reverted since most of the other games in the series say which number they are in the series, so I didn't think it would be a huge deal. I'll totally understand what you have to say since it's not really a big deal at all, I'm just curious. Have a good day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarioKartWiiFanatic ( talk • contribs) 21:20, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

It's nothing you need to stop editing over, it's just unnecessary numbers. No one refers to BOTW as the nineteenth Zelda game just as no one calls Mario Galaxy the twelfth Mario game. It's not commonly alluded to as that, and it generally just leads to arguments over time, when editors inevitably argue over counting methods when you're dealing with long running series with tons of spin-offs, remakes, and other non-numbered entries. Sergecross73 msg me 03:08, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Okay, I understand, thank you MarioKartWiiFanatic ( talk) 00:19, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

So, where do we stand on articles for video game characters anyway? Looking at the recent discussions for Amy Rose and Coco Bandicoot, you and others mentioned they don't measure up to the current standards of editors in the project generally expect or something along those lines.

I know video game character articles have been a subject of debate since the mass merges in 2008-2009. But I don't remember it being this bad until the last couple years or so. To be blunt, I really don't like how character articles are treated now. MoonJet ( talk) 22:18, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

I'll return the bluntness: It's nothing more than the WP:GNG. You just need to find something better than passing mentions and the absolute worst of the video game industry churnalism to get there. Your definition of "significant coverage" and "reliable source" is just way way off. Sergecross73 msg me 02:37, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

To be fair, I think it often goes beyond the GNG. I know I'm not alone in thinking video game character articles are too harshly judged, especially in comparison to characters from other mediums and most other areas on Wikipedia, to be honest. I'm not saying you are doing that, necessarily. I just think some editors expect too much. MoonJet ( talk) 02:51, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't think that they're too harshly judged, I think that other fictional character areas, like comics or animation, aren't closely watched enough. The video game area is merely active enough to be enforcing things correctly. Sergecross73 msg me 03:10, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Plus, I should mention WP:INU, which is separate from GNG. Some editors expect out-of-universe coverage, rather than simply a creation and/or reception section talking about her within the games. In fact, that was the main problem the nominator (Cat's Tuxedo) had with the Coco Bandicoot article, it seems. MoonJet ( talk) 03:32, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, having some sort of real world/separate impact certainly goes a long ways in convincing people that a split for a game character is warranted. You work in the music content area too, so think of it how we handle splitting off song articles from album articles. If a song's coverage in reliable sources is largely just in the context of album reviews and brief mentions in articles largely about the album, we generally don't split the song out. But if there's commentary on the song doing notable things on its own - charting, getting music videos, being used in other media like movies/sporting events, or other notable coverage it gets from being a single rather than part of the album, then people are generally mores supportive of a split. Same concept applies. Sergecross73 msg me 16:23, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Okay, that actually makes a bit more sense. Although, I've always been under the impression that the reason we usually don't use album reviews to establish notability for a song is because album reviews usually contain only passing mentions of the song, (except when sites do track-by-track album reviews, which does happen sometimes) rather than them not being covered outside the context of the album.

Either way, it's surely not the only measure? As there's also WP:SPINOUT to consider. Hence we still sometimes create articles for songs even if they didn't chart or have a music video, if the coverage in reliable sources is extensive enough.

But in that case, let's use Amy Rose and Coco Bandicoot again. Both of these characters do have coverage outside the games they appear in. Amy has been covered in academic studies, has been been a subject of progressivism and has discussion about her appearing in the upcoming Sonic films, while Coco has been featured in accolades outside the Crash series and has been cosplayed (with reliable source talking about it). Coco has also been in that NYM Gamer article. I know in my gut both characters are very deserving of an article, and I wouldn't be trying to get them one if I didn't feel this way.

I'll be back soon to provide you with sources for what I'm talking about. MoonJet ( talk) 22:22, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Have you considered writing character articles for various fan wikias instead? They have much more lax sourcing standards and virtually no notability guidelines. You wouldn't have any of the roadblocks that keep preventing you from what you want to do. I recommend giving it some thought, as I think you're getting closer to a topic ban than you are getting a consensus in favor of these articles. Sergecross73 msg me 23:03, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't use Wikias much. I've always been more of a Wikipedia person. But since you talked about sourcing outside the games, here's some:

Amy Rose:

https://www.shacknews.com/article/86297/super-smash-bros-for-wii-u-and-3ds---who-missed-the-cut

https://www.academia.edu/273382/Gendered_Representation_in_Computer_and_Videogames

https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/women-power-no-glass-ceilings-broken-7792496/

https://www.polygon.com/tv/2017/8/2/16085836/sonic-the-hedgehog-knuckles-feminist-woke-cartoon

https://ew.com/tv/2017/08/01/sonic-boom-feminist/

https://collider.com/sonic-characters-we-want-to-see-next/

Coco Bandicoot:

https://www.nymgamer.com/?p=17216

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gareth-Schott/publication/237970073_Girl_Gamers_and_their_Relationship_with_the_Gaming_Culture/links/6136f0c70360302a008433fe/Girl-Gamers-and-their-Relationship-with-the-Gaming-Culture.pdf

https://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2013/03/the-50-greatest-heroines-in-video-game-history/

https://www.cnet.com/pictures/photos-the-8-most-underrated-videogame-characters-ever/3/

https://unrealitymag.com/coco-bandicoot-cosplay-goes-far-better-than-youd-imagine/

These sources all go inline with the "out-of-universe" coverage you were talking about. Keep in mind, I'm just showing you sources of what I'm talking about, rather expecting you to give me the "okay" to restore the articles. MoonJet ( talk) 23:47, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hey Serge. Yesterday I spent two hours yesterday going through a Chilean IP editor's edits over the last few months to mostly British artists' discographies. Their justifications are often nonsensical, like "France is not a Germanic country"(??), "Scotland is not a country" (which is simply incorrect) and just having entirely unrelated reasons for removing content, like removing songs in a section on an article about UK Singles Chart statistics that clearly says "spent 70 weeks in the top 100" that "the songs did not spend 100 weeks in the top 100". Either way, the edits are disruptive (as they're often repeated after they're reverted) and often break formatting. They quite often (as with today on Shakira discography) are replacing sourced charts with unsourced ones and removing chart positions lower than 100 for no reason (and despite the fact chart peaks to 200 places are considered valid). I'm not sure if the approach here is to block the ranges or protect the 15 or so discographies that are their regular targets, but the three ranges they've edited within (and the edits on them are almost exclusively this disruptive Chilean editor) are:

• 181.203.66.61/16
• 191.125.172.41/16
• 191.126.141.178/16.

Today alone they've jumped from the 181 range to the 191.125 range. They've hit up over 30 discographies, but their main targets that might benefit from being protected are (sorted in rough order from recent disruption): The Specials discography, Shakira discography, Five discography, Westlife discography, Morrissey discography, The Smiths discography, Wham! discography, George Michael discography, U2 discography, Queen discography, Freddie Mercury discography, Erasure discography, The Beatles discography, Meat Loaf discography, KSI discography and Melanie C discography. The thing I'm concerned about is that if those are protected, then they'll just move on to other discographies. Ss 112 00:08, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

If ferret thinks he can range block, we can see if he'll do that. Otherwise, I don't mind starting to protect the discographies that are frequently being disrupted. Sergecross73 msg me 16:25, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

I'll let you know if I see any more of the disruption occur soon. I've got the ranges bookmarked and checking them every day. Ss 112 06:09, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Serge. The editor whose disruption over the case of the letter "t" that I asked you to protect Un Verano Sin Ti for is back, now with personal attacks in Spanish. Probably merits a block + perhaps page protection just for this edit summary alone, right? [4] They also dropped some unhinged rants on 2022 Buffalo shooting the other day, where they claim they're going to tell Twitter about Wikipedia (lol). This editor very clearly has some issues they need to resolve offline. They're causing disruption right now on Un Verano Sin Ti and The Marías. Ss 112 06:09, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

The pages have been protected, IPs (and a registered account) blocked, and most edit summaries revdel-ed by EvergreenFir (except this, where apparently I'm the one fighting over a letter). Just check the unhinged stuff they came out with in those edit summaries. Yikes. Ss 112 06:45, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, looks like most of this happened while I was away. The pages have been protected by another admin already. They were relatively short ones though, so I'll happily re-up longer ones if necessary. I revdel'd a few of the silly rants in edit summaries though. Sergecross73 msg me 16:04, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Listen man, I know you don't like the fact that I was a bit irresponsible on this website. But you see, that's not always been the case and like I said, all Wikipedia pages get edited one day or another. Anyways, besides that enormously long argument we had on my talk page, I promise to continue doing good edits and not being so disruptive and not adding any personal comments such as "Woahness" ;) As for the file uploading scenario, the only time I'm going to use it is mostly for the WWE Pay-per views or new movies I care about. So what do you say, you give me what I want, and I'll give you what you want. Let's put the past behind us. ChallengeCick ( talk) 07:03, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Your response to an extended final warning is to try to negotiate some of your editing rights back because of your "good editing"? This is only reinforces my belief that you don't seem to understand how Wikipedia works and aren't ready to be editing. You need to focus all of your effort on learning the website and not getting a long-term block right now. Sergecross73 msg me 11:10, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Lilwaynecharts ( talk · contribs)

Do you remember that IP who keep adding "Knife Talk" as Certified Lover Boy's third single. The editor is back again is still adding unsourced or poorly sourced content in the article [5] [6] [7]. TheAmazingPeanuts ( talk) 17:53, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Someone got him before I did. It's a pretty short block though, so let me know if it needs to be re-applied later on. Sergecross73 msg me 19:17, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2022).

Administrator changes Tamzin Barek • Darkwind • Geometry guy • ProcseeBot • RoyBoy • Sean Whitton • Valereee • Visorstuff • WAvegetarian Sn0wflake → VersedFenrir

CheckUser changes Ivanvector

Guideline and policy news

• Several areas of improvement collated from community member votes have been identified in the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines. The areas of improvement have been sent back for review and you are invited to provide input on these areas.

Technical news

• Administrators using the mobile web interface can now access Special:Block directly from user pages. ( T307341)
• The IP Info feature has been deployed to all wikis as a Beta Feature. Any autoconfirmed user may enable the feature using the "IP info" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features. Autoconfirmed users will be able to access basic information about an IP address that includes the country and connection method. Those with advanced privileges (admin, bureaucrat, checkuser) will have access to extra information that includes the Internet Service Provider and more specific location.

Arbitration

• Remedy 2 of the Rachel Marsden case has been rescinded following a motion. The remedy previously authorised administrators to delete or reduce to a stub, together with their talk pages, articles related to Rachel Marsden when they violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy.
• An arbitration case regarding WikiProject Tropical Cyclones has been closed.

Hello I saw a comment on made on the Sonic Frontiers page and I made an edit based on the comment you made is the edit good? please let me know — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevie extreme ( talk • contribs) 18:49, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

( talk page stalker) No, your edit was completely unsourced. -- ThomasO1989 ( talk) 18:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

No, it still had issues. You didn't use a reliable source to verify your content addition, and social media users complaining doesn't really for into a "marketing/promotion" section anyways... Sergecross73 msg me 19:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Serge I would like to apologize because of how hard I was to work with and for not constructing my sentence properly — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevie extreme ( talk • contribs) 19:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

It's alright. It takes time to learn how to edit Wikipedia. If you take the time to go slowly and learn things, I'm sure you can do it. Sergecross73 msg me 20:14, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the support Stevie extreme ( talk) 20:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi. You blocked a user. Can you not make it edit its own talk page because it keeps on reverting mine? [User:Train and unicorn fan| Train and unicorn fan🦄🚆]] talk 11:37, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Per WP:BLANKING, users are allowed to remove warnings on their talk page. I do not recommend removing TPA. 47.227.95.73 ( talk) 12:38, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

It's of little consequence either way. They are blocked for a month and no sane Admin would unblock someone contributing such blatant vandalism. Sergecross73 msg me 13:31, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

It is no longer an issue, because the AfD has been closed, but your edit note here does not seem to take account of what the tag said. It drew the reader's attention to the fact that this was a proposed target for a merger, and directed them to the place where the discussion that included that proposal was happening. I can understand that you were unfamiliar with the tag, but that does not mean it should be removed without understanding it. If it is right that a proposed merger target be informed (per WP:Merge), it is always right. See discussion at WT:Deletion Policy. Kevin McE ( talk) 14:03, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

No, I meant exactly what I said in the edit summary - don't open up merge discussions when there's already an active WP:AFD. We don't want concurrent discussions like that going. Your action only would have been appropriate if you had done it before the AFD. Not during it. It's a moot point regardless, as the article was kept, and was honestly never in an real danger of being merged or delete. Sergecross73 msg me 14:35, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

I don't doubt that you meant it, but you clearly didn't understand it. I did not start a merge discussion, there were not concurrent discussions, it would be impossible to alert people to something that has happened at AfD before that is opened. As to your last point, I had already told you that. Again, please make sure you are clear as to what a template says before you criticise use of it. Kevin McE ( talk) 15:32, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Nevermind, I misunderstood. Disregard. Sergecross73 msg me 15:39, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello sir, I have created an article that has lasted up to a week , please help me to review it So it can be indexed on google, here is the article Imani Lewis Kenpmi ( talk) 13:33, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure, but I think it will eventually just happen automatically? I've never had do anything special to get any of my article creations to show up in a Google search. Sergecross73 msg me 13:44, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Serge,

I just tried to correct a mistake (which I suspect is also biased) and was told it was reverted because it was "not constructive." Here is the message I received:

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 Mass shooting, 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 read the definition of mass shootings, which excludes terrorist attacks, toward the top of the article and look at the Israel section you'll see the inconsistency that I tried to correct. Could you take a look?

Thanks,

Liveinthefuture Liveinthefuture ( talk) 14:35, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello! So, I'm not real familiar with that content area, so I really can't comment on the accuracy of either versions, but the warning you received was just a "template" pre-set warning. Just a general "that edit wasn't seen as good" by that particular editor. I'd just reach out to them directly and talk it over on their talk page. If you can't see eye to eye, you could start a discussion on the article talk page, and hopefully come to a WP:CONSENSUS on what to do. Sergecross73 msg me 14:51, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, Serge. So, I was editing on to music articles and i have tried my best to read all the default Templates provided by Wikipedia for how to edit such articles. But i'm having a few doubts and i saw you too have done well a noticeable amount of edits on music articles, my doubt is: Is it alright, if i use commas to separate Artist names in writing fields like done in Template:Track listing, doing so will also reduce a lot of extra load of space on the articles. paperpseudonym (talk) 14:43, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi again, it's been a while and you still haven't replied. Maybe you forgot to see my message? paperpseudonym (talk) 14:48, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

So sorry! I started responding, got side tracked, had my partial response deleted, and never circled back. I'll respond in an hour or two. Sorry! Sergecross73 msg me 14:55, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Oh, that's alright. I understand, take your time. thank you. paperpseudonym (talk) 17:32, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Alright, so now I've got time to reply. Sorry for the delay, I'm generally happy to try to give help on this sort of thing, especially in areas I typically work in, like music.

So, my answer may vary a bit depending on the context. If we're talking about creating articles from scratch, I just generally take a "do my best and go for it" type approach. I don't have every formatting requirement memorized. And I don't particularly think the average reader cares if I use a comma instead of a hyphen or a bullet point or something. And there's a bunch of editors who go around doing standardizing edits like who just fix it for me. And because it doesn't really matter to me, I just let them do it. And everyone's happy. The article creation templates I created for myself years back tend to be in "good enough" shape where any tweaks are minor and not a big deal. So, if this is your situation, I'd say just go for it, and if its wrong, someone will tweak it for you.

If you're asking more because you actually want to be one of those types I was just talking about that love to go through and make sure every single article is standardized...then I wouldn't be the best person to ask when it comes to little stuff like commas or hyphens or whatnot. A bunch of editors tend to watch the activity on my talk page though, so if you're looking for more help like that, then someone else may chime in.

Let me know if that was helpful, or if there's anything else you want to ask about. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 17:44, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Oh, i see... well, i was just confirming so that i don't end up making a big mess for the change. Anyway, your answer was helpful. I looked at the Template:Track listing, and there too i can't seem to find anything on this topic and in track listing it too uses commas, so i take it as both are appropriate? thank you for the reply. paperpseudonym (talk) 18:13, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

You could always try asking at Template talk: Track listing and see if anyone knows. It's not super-active, but it's not dead either. If no one answers you could post a link to the discussion at some of the music related WP:WIKIPROJECTs too. Sergecross73 msg me 18:32, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Oh, alright. Well, while we're still talking of the topic, i've also wanted to know what is the use of this parameter used in track listing, collapsed = . Could you tell me that too? I don't see it visually collapsed even when value 'yes' is entered into it in reader mode?? paperpseudonym (talk) 18:38, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Why do you seem to think there are issues with my edits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhichUserAmI ( talk • contribs) 15:16, 27 June 2022 (UTC) I have already addressed that and am currently correcting that oversight. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhichUserAmI ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

I have no idea where you've "already addressed it". Every edit I've seen you make on the page has violated it very badly. Sergecross73 msg me 15:42, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

I've tried. I've done everything you and that little Ferret kid have said, yet you still complain and ban me from editing the article. I removed the codes. I significantly 80% cut down on the Action Replay section, leaving only the most important, cut-and-dry, straight to the point objective facts. I removed all sections that violated NPOV. I ADDED to the article in terms of grammatical corrections and updating the figures to the most recent available. What more exactly do you want me to do? Please explain to me exactly how badly I 'violated' your site and lay out exactly what I can do to fix my egregious error and outstanding lapse of judgement. Please, go ahead, be my guest.

But no, don't bother, that would be a waste of your time. Because even if I followed every single step on your list, you would likely still find something to complain about, because it isn't written by yourself apparently. WhichUserAmI ( talk) 17:03, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

You're actually lucky you aren't fully blocked already for some of the other edits you've made. Continuing with the personal attacks is a fast track to get you there. -- ferret ( talk) 17:16, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

When I opened up with "For starters", alongside my initial warning that your content was nowhere near appropriate, I really felt like I was being clear that there were many issues with your edits, and I was only beginning to explain the issues.

Like I was alluding to before, there's a lot to learn about editing Wikipedia. And the worst thing you can do is jump right in and make massive changes to popular articles and have an attitude about it when someone points out how wrong you're doing things. I can keep explaining if you truly are interested in learning. But if you just want to sloppily write whatever you want, go start a blog or make a Twitter account or something. Sergecross73 msg me 17:19, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes. I am interested in learning what exactly I am doing wrong, because I have knowledge that I would like to contribute.

This is why I began editing the article in the first place.

I feel that my contributions have been satisfactory to the rules you have presented to me, and that they fit well within the article.

So, would you please be so kind as to explain why exactly they are not. WhichUserAmI ( talk) 17:33, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Sergecross73. I see you’re part of the Video Games WikiProject, and was hoping you could help me with some proposed edits to improve the Playrix article. I have a conflict of interest, so I can't update the article myself. Would you be willing to take a look? It’s posted here Talk:Playrix#Playrix_Requested_Edits_June_2022. Thanks for your help. Interstellar108 ( talk) 16:25, 28 June 2022 (UTC)