User talk:Usucha: Difference between revisions

Line 90: Line 90:

== [[Medri Bahri]] ==

== [[Medri Bahri]] ==

I have the right to remain silent signed [[User:Menhelicks|Menhelicks]] ([[User talk:Menhelicks|talk]]) 01:41, 3 October 2025 (UTC) [[User:Menhelicks|Menhelicks]] ([[User talk:Menhelicks|talk]]) 08:36, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

[[User:Menhelicks|Menhelicks]] ([[User talk:Menhelicks|talk]]) 01:41, 3 October 2025 (UTC) [[User:Menhelicks|Menhelicks]] ([[User talk:Menhelicks|talk]]) 08:36, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I’m ~riley. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Talk:Kyabetsu Taro—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 Help desk. Thanks. ~riley (talk) 07:56, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I’m HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Nichinichi kore kōjitsu (movie), a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:37, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SpringProof. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, “Nichinichi kore kōjitsu“.

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 20:03, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, would it help if I used Amazon ? Thanks GrahamHardy (talk) 10:53, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@GrahamHardy: Not entirely. Per WP:BLPSELFPUB, her self-published bibliography is alright to be used as a source, but more than 50% of the article’s sources are already from that one page. It’s best to choose reliable, independent, third-party sources. Take a look at WP:INDY if you need more help. _signed, SpringProof ^talk 03:56, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SpringProof. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Bob Papenbrook, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. BangJan1999 19:40, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SpringProof. Your comment was addressed, sorry about the previous lack of an editor’s summary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:2FC0:F:E123:5FF5:2949:5DEF (talk) 21:39, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding one! 🙂 _signed, SpringProof ^talk 21:44, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

so anyhting thats not left wing is “less than neutral” right? 132.170.212.27 (talk) 00:31, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Carrie (1976 film), without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources to see how to add references to an article. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 01:54, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that the edits that you reverted (and I was going to revert, too) could be made at least a little salvageable with a citation needed tag. Thanks for the concern. 🙂 _signed, SpringProof ^talk 02:03, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If they weren’t newly added I’d agree with tagging them and leaving them alone, but when it’s newly added information I do like to go back to the editor who originally added the content and who theoretically should be best positioned to provide a source…after all, they should have some basis for the claims they’re inserting. DonIago (talk) 17:02, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Menhelicks (talk) 01:41, 3 October 2025 (UTC) Menhelicks (talk) 08:36, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]