User talk:Ethiopian Epic: Difference between revisions

Line 43: Line 43:

[[File:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Hello, I’m [[User:NebY|NebY]]. I wanted to let you know that one or more of [[Special:Contributions/Ethiopian Epic|your recent contributions]] to [[:Zilog Z80]] have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use [[User:Ethiopian Epic/sandbox|your sandbox]]. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the [[Wikipedia:Teahouse|Teahouse]] or the [[Wikipedia:Help desk|Help desk]]. Thanks.<!– Template:uw-vandalism1 –> [[User:NebY|NebY]] ([[User talk:NebY|talk]]) 00:05, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

[[File:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Hello, I’m [[User:ChaseKiwi|ChaseKiwi]]. I noticed that you recently [[Wikipedia:Content removal|removed content]] from [[:English Channel]] without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate [[Help:Edit summary|edit summary]]. If this was a mistake, don’t worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use [[User:Ethiopian Epic/sandbox|your sandbox]]. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on [[User_talk:ChaseKiwi|my talk page]]. ”I noted you had removed a statement that was a rewording of a similar statement sourced much earlier in a long article and had been marked in error by another as citation needed. This is lazy editing by you and another and by forcing the issue with a deletion claimed in error to be unsourced all you did was to create work for another editor. Please consider being more considerate, and either check whole article with of course verification of the source or add a trusted source with slightly revised wording as I have done to improve the communities work.”<!– Template:uw-delete1 –> [[User:ChaseKiwi|ChaseKiwi]] ([[User talk:ChaseKiwi|talk]]) 16:46, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

== Do not change dates on templates! ==

Hi Ethiopian Epic! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Samurai several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you’re aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Samurai, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Tinynanorobots (talk) 16:21, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you are unsure where on the talk page to discuss it, I have already discussed the issue regarding samurai being retainers here. I am looking forward to hear from you. Tinynanorobots (talk) 15:42, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators’ noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Tinynanorobots (talk) 09:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ethiopian Epic,

It would help if you came and participated in the discussion on WP:ANI so we could hear your point of view on this dispute. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to Yasuke, 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 an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

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

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.

Nil Einne (talk) 18:39, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I asked for a third opinion[1]. Tinynanorobots (talk) 12:10, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Hong Kong 47, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. CodeTalker (talk) 07:51, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I’m NebY. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Zilog Z80 have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. NebY (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I’m ChaseKiwi. I noticed that you recently removed content from English Channel 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. I noted you had removed a statement that was a rewording of a similar statement sourced much earlier in a long article and had been marked in error by another as citation needed. This is lazy editing by you and another and by forcing the issue with a deletion claimed in error to be unsourced all you did was to create work for another editor. Please consider being more considerate, and either check whole article with of course verification of the source or add a trusted source with slightly revised wording as I have done to improve the communities work. ChaseKiwi (talk) 16:46, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have noticed that you have updated the date= on several articles to the current date. This date is supposed to be the date the template was added, not today’s date. Please do not update dates on { {cn} } or other templates. Only put today’s date on items you contribute. RastaKins (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply