User talk:ActiveContributor2020: Difference between revisions

Hello, ActiveContributor2020! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes “~~~~”; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being “adopted” by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 20:10, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I’m NinjaRobotPirate. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Bill Hader, but you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It’s been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:24, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled “Edit summary” below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article’s history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. 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.
Thanks! 220 of ^ßorg 12:42, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In your recent edit to Marilyn Monroe, you added links to an article which did not add content or meaning, or repeated the same link several times throughout the article. Please see Wikipedia’s guideline on links to avoid overlinking. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 01:05, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the “prompt me when entering a blank edit summary” box in your preferences. Thanks!
Please use edit summaries when you can! It tremendously helps other users understand what edits are being made to Wikipedia articles. You’ve been contributing a lot, and I hope that you keep up the great work! —PerpetuityGrat (talk) 23:34, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cité de Carcassonne, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Roman. 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) 05:56, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsed per WP:CIVIL, vagueness, and other policies or guidelines. Mathglot (talk) 03:54, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors’ contributions. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as “edit warring” and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges on that page. This isn’t done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. Hemiauchenia (talk) 02:53, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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:

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

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article’s talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Hemiauchenia (talk) 03:37, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You should fix all the misinformation on Marjorie Taylor Greene 2600:1005:B126:35A2:D9B3:264F:EC6F:7243 (talk) 19:09, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ActiveContributor2020. I just wanted to make sure I explained this diff of mine. With Twinkle, you can restore any version of an article history at the push of a button. I did it to prevent you from having to manually revert everything. I hope I understood your intentions correctly. JBchrch talk 18:05, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see you’re trying to make changes to Eric Zemmour, and have been reverted twice. This is a topic that is both in the world news, as well as undergoing intense discussion at the Talk page of the article, down to the level of individual words that should or shouldn’t be included. Heading to the article to make changes to the WP:LEADSENTENCE without being aware of this history or taking part in the discussions on the Talk page, is very unlikely to be successful. There has also been edit warring going on at the article before you got there, and you should be aware of that history as well, so you don’t get caught up in it inadvertently. You’re welcome to edit the article, as is any other editor, but a knowledge of the background and history, and especially exchanging ideas with other contributors before making changes, will increase your chances of success. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 19:15, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ActiveContributor2020! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Éric Zemmour that may not have been. “Minor edit” has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. JBchrch talk 15:39, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your recent contributions to Eric Zemmour. I had to remove them, for reasons explained in the edit summaries (see the article History tab). In brief, as a new user, I’d advise you to start with small edits to the body of the article (the part under the Table of Contents), and not to the WP:LEAD, which has special requirements, and especially not to the WP:LEADSENTENCE until you are more experienced. That said, this is not as serious as violations of WP:Verifiability, and I can see that you have taken that advice and are attempting to adhere to it, and that’s great, so bravo for that! Keep up the good work, and keep on learning about Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and you’ll be fine. Fee free to contact me with questions on my Talk page at any time. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 02:27, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Château de la Celle

added a link pointing to Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs

La Celle-Saint-Cloud

added a link pointing to Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs

(Opt-out instructions.) —DPL bot (talk) 18:05, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, it’s advised not to add new replies to archived threads, but thanks to your notification I was able to see your message and fix the problem. Feel free to reach out again whenever you see this error, but you can also do a quick copypaste like I did in the diff just above, if you’d like to learn to repair these yourself. Thanks for keeping an eye on mobile accessibility! Best, Folly Mox (talk) 12:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I’m Neveselbert. I noticed that you recently removed content from Theresa May without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don’t worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 20:41, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Julien Guibert, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Clamecy.

(Opt-out instructions.) —DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Charles XIV John while logged out. Please be mindful not to perform controversial edits while logged out, or your account risks being blocked from editing. Please consider reading up on Wikipedia’s policy on multiple accounts before editing further. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. TylerBurden (talk) 16:04, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello- Below are a few editing suggestions to make it easier for you and others to collaborate on the encyclopedia. Please preview, consolidate, and summarize your edits:

• Try to consolidate your edits, at least at the section level, to avoid cluttering the page’s edit history; this makes it easier for your fellow editors to understand your intentions, and makes it easier for those monitoring activity on the article.
  • The show preview button (beside the “publish changes” button) is helpful for this; use it to view your changes incrementally before finally saving the page once you’re satisfied with your edits.
• Please remember to explain each edit with an edit summary (box above the “publish changes” button).

Thanks in advance for considering these suggestions. Eric ^talk 03:38, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I noticed you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field
to explain your reasoning for an edit and/or describe what it changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. Even something short is better than nothing. For example, for this edit on Montreal, a verbose edit summary would be something like “Move note outside punctuation”, but as little as “punctuation” or “punct” or “note placement” would be fine.

To help yourself remember, you may wish to enable “prompt me when entering a blank edit summary” in your preferences.

For reference, previous topics:
§ Preview – Consolidate – Summarize,
§ December 2024,
§ Please use edit summaries!,
§ April 2021

Thanks! — W.andrea (talk) 12:49, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not pipe links unnecessarily. See WP:NOPIPE and WP:NOTBROKEN. DrKay (talk) 05:34, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As previously mentioned to you, please stop piping links unnecessarily. See WP:NOPIPE. FDW777 (talk) 14:09, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]