Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to List of serial killers by number of victims have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: List of serial killers by number of victims was changed by Setarip (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.863109 on 2022-01-06T19:40:44+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG ( talk) 19:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Daniel Camargo Barbosa. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically

I DID NOT, I ADDED A PHOTOGRAPH OF HIM IN THE 1950'S AND YOU DELETED IT FOR COPYRIGHT FFS THE GUY WHO TOOK IT IS PROBABLY DEAD reverted.

• If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
• The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Daniel Camargo Barbosa was changed by Setarip (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.857619 on 2022-01-06T19:47:02+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG ( talk) 19:47, 6 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on User:Glaceonstan. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. — C.Fred ( talk) 00:49, 13 March 2022 (UTC) reply

its proved hes a furry Setarip ( talk) 00:51, 13 March 2022 (UTC) reply

You shouldn't change their user page one way or the other. — C.Fred ( talk) 00:53, 13 March 2022 (UTC) reply

Oh, didn't even notice someone had added misinformation to my page. Thanks for that Glaceonstan ( talk) 01:09, 13 March 2022 (UTC) reply

bruh its proved ur a furry Setarip ( talk) 20:46, 13 March 2022 (UTC) reply

Let it go. I'd say unless you've got reliable sources, but the sources would have to link to the Wikipedia account, so frankly, it's in your best interests to just drop the subject. — C.Fred ( talk) 23:59, 13 March 2022 (UTC) reply

hi Setarip ( talk) 18:04, 19 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your contributions to The Most Boring Day in History. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. JTtheOG ( talk) 17:27, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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:

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! ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 14:35, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

It is especially important to use edit summaries when reverting the good-faith contributions of other editors. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 22:53, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply

it isnt good faith he removed the collages by mass Setarip ( talk) 13:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

They removed the collages en masse because they believe that was an improvement of the articles. It was good-faith, though disruptive. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 14:20, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{ Ctopics/aware}} template.

This is why your edits have been removed from the WP:ITN discussion; since you are not extended confirmed, you are not permitted to participate in the topic area. BilledMammal ( talk) 11:11, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:The Most Boring Day in History. Thanks! Newystats ( talk) 03:04, 1 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm DreamRimmer. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to PewDiePie vs T-Series—because it 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. – DreamRimmer ( talk) 13:14, 21 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AntientNestor was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Fails WP:EFFECT and WP:DEPTH

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:The Most Boring Day in History and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AntientNestor ( talk) 15:32, 1 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, Setarip! 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! AntientNestor ( talk) 15:32, 1 March 2024 (UTC) reply