User talk:Howdoesitgo1

Welcome![edit]

Hi Howdoesitgo1! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! I dream of horses (Contribs) Please notify me after replying off my talk page. Thank you. 10:14, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020[edit]

Hello, I'm Magnolia677. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Tanana, Alaska, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:19, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Questions[edit]

Why did you remove the birth date and add a nowiki here? What does your edit summary "spch" mean? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:23, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion[edit]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Jim Rash".The discussion is about the topic Jim Rash.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

--George Ho (talk) 20:02, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have some cookies![edit]

You are a good faith editor mostly and you do need to deserve credit for that. I do not want to argue with you anymore. Here, have some cookies.

Cookies!

Destroyeraa has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

~ Destroyeraa🌀 00:49, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Daily Mail reference at Tina Turner[edit]

Hi. Please do not use the Daily Mail as you did at Tina Turner. See WP:DAILYMAIL. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 10:22, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit reversion[edit]

In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick (Talk) 20:37, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary Sanctions Notice - American Politics[edit]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

power~enwiki (π, ν) 01:52, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't misuse edit requests[edit]

Edit requests are only allowed for totally uncontroversial edits, IOW get a consensus on the talk page first. Other options are to just create a regular section and ask for clarification. -- Valjean (talk) 23:10, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, people ignore talk pages. I posted on there and was asking a few things. You're helpful, I mean it's silly how things are going on this site. I know there are some interesting or competent people on here. However there is so much controversy (see Larry Sanger). Howdoesitgo1 (talk) 23:46, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I follow him on Twitter. That is a truly sad situation. He has completely abandoned reliance on RS and now traffics in conspiracy theories and debunked falsehoods. -- Valjean (talk) 23:50, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll mention some of the very problematic things on here. Weather related articles, particularly typhoons, hurricanes, earthquakes draw some hotheads. I can't even edit these words, "school release days". Take a look at Tina Turner. People are trying to scrub mentions of things that are historical on there and in other places. I know some of this is due to there are not that many editors on here now. There is a substantial percentage of international editors who have their biases. Also general incompetence is easily found. It's disheartening, I mean I am really trying. The way the "principles" of the site are tossed around is stupid. They wouldn't understand said principles if they were smacked by them. This site has no official statement furthermore. The abuse of what the site stands for must stop. Howdoesitgo1 (talk) 23:56, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Valjean, could you help? Howdoesitgo1 (talk) 03:51, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:58, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Files[edit]

You are deleting important files.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Howdoesitgo1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Can't figure out the appeal process

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. — O Still Small Voice of Clam 07:07, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.