Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Killing of Larry Payne, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Materialscientist ( talk) 04:06, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Eric Cartman. 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. Materialscientist ( talk) 08:00, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Sean Combs, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 01:08, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello Speakfor23. Almost all of the legal issues you added were already covered elsewhere in the article. There's no need to cover the same ground again in a "legal issues" section. Thanks, — Diannaa ( talk) 02:27, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Polo G, you may be blocked from editing. Patient Zero talk 23:13, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to ASAP Rocky. Patient Zero talk 23:14, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
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:
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.
The page which you recently edited and which comes under this rule is Susan Sarandon. Burrobert ( talk) 03:16, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Rubiales affair, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 16:37, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Albert Luque, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 17:02, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello Speakfor23! Your additions to Operation Condor 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.
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, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa ( talk) 13:30, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Young Thug, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 17:07, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Von Miller, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 18:45, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute 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.
Please don't think switching from an IP to a named account fools anyone. Suggested reading WP:BRD. W C M email 17:46, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Nice try on that "don't think you're fooling anyone" claim. I never did try to fool anyone so don't make the argument I did. Wikipedia signs you out if you forget to click on the "sign me in for a year" tab. I'm not making the edits now, so don't go further. Speakfor23 ( talk) 17:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Marine Le Pen, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 01:01, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
I didn't know Karina was actually the First Lady. In my edit I put her as a quick placeholder for people to fill with the correct information. M4rtin238 ( talk) 01:53, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page National Rally, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 02:04, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Dolly Parton, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 20:02, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Dani Alves, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 17:12, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
It is not a good look to, rather than read an article to find where information already is, insist you have your way until you are shown where. I have pointed you in the right direction, but even just Ctrl+F keywords is an option that is much less hostile towards fellow editors.
Furthermore, and as I have seen you have already been warned about several times here, you really need to understand due weight. Both in terms of when it is appropriate to create an independent section for something, and what kind of 'extracurricular' elements are appropriate in a footballer BLP career section.
Specifically, adding a new paragraph to a career section to say (effectively) "it was reported that someone else behaved inappropriately towards them", particularly when the revelations have not gone further than existing and the brief media reaction was just 'this has been said', is far too much prominence. And there would be reason to discuss if it should go in a public image section or similar since it's not effected their careers, if it is significant enough to include in the first place. Kingsif ( talk) 23:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
It is enlightening to includeetc, I would also urge you to read WP:SYNTH. I would find it best for you to read and understand that before editing any more BLPs. That you think other, tangential or potentially unrelated, information should be included just because you think
it raises more questionsis very concerning, especially when we are talking about BLPs and legal cases. If there are reliable sources that connect different legal cases, you can include them but have to adhere to how the source connects them. While I am pleased that you've later in this thread said you want to contribute to the encyclopedia, you must know that this means you should not be trying to influence how readers interpret things by bringing up other things. Kingsif ( talk) 03:44, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page T.I., may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 21:42, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
It is clear that "living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations and arrests do not amount to a conviction. For individuals who are not public figures—that is, individuals not covered by § Public figures—editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed or is accused of having committed a crime, unless a conviction has been secured.
If different judicial proceedings result in seemingly contradictory outcomes that do not overrule each other,[e] include sufficient explanatory information."
The edit relates to a lawsuit involving Disney executives who are public figures and there is no conclusive suggestion of guilt. Speakfor23 ( talk) 07:38, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lauren Boebert. 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:
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. VQuakr ( talk) 21:36, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Elvis 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. - FlightTime ( open channel) 19:07, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Please discuss this change on the talk page and stop editwarring on other pages. - FlightTime ( open channel) 19:06, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Margrethe II, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 00:26, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
You have recently made edits related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. This is a standard message to inform you that post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 22:09, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 18:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dwayne Johnson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Endeavor. 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) 05:51, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your update to Irma Anderson. I notice you tried to add year of birth as 1930. Do you have a published source for this? For now, I have applied {{ Birth based on age at death}} and {{ Death date and given age}}. • Gene93k ( talk) 03:17, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
P.S. I also didn't see cause of death in the supporting citation. • Gene93k ( talk) 03:30, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
I have even included a Movie Web source backing what Screen Rant claimed. Try denying that source too. [7]. Speakfor23 ( talk) 13:44, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Priscilla (film) 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. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 15:55, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Super Bowl LVIII, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 21:17, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Wow, you added a lot of material that barely touches on Ed Sanders to the article about him. Your addition to the paragraph introduces six new characters (Azoff, Henley, Frey, Horowitz, Inciardi and Kosinski), mentioning them 13 times while quadrupling its length, while mentioning Sanders four times. This does not seem like an appropriate edit to an encyclopedia article. Larry Koenigsberg ( talk) 19:41, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Run-DMC, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 20:31, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Mark Pitts, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 13:34, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
On 13 April 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Karen Yarbrough, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai ( talk) 15:27, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page David Pecker, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 22:26, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 2004 USC Trojans football team, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 16:58, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 2004 USC Trojans football team, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 16:58, 24 April 2024 (UTC)