User talk:4byu123

Your recent edit to Samaritans[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your recent edit on Samaritans, but I had to revert it because per our style guide, when an era style is used (such as BCE and CE, or BC and AD) in an article, a discussion should be pursued on the article's talk page explaining why that style is inappropriate for the article's topic, before changing that style. A personal preference for one style or the other is not sufficient to make changes. Thank you! tubedogg (talk) 18:02, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 2018[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at Talk:Christine Blasey Ford, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Brad v 17:41, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Christine Blasey Ford shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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. See BRD for 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Brad v 19:53, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alert[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 recently 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 any 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. Galobtter (pingó mió) 19:57, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How did you manage to find something[edit]

called "BALSAP" so fast? [1]. You have like 10 edits to this account yet you quote Wikipedia policy like a pro. Volunteer Marek 22:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Christopher C. Garrett (September 21)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by RoySmith were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

There's several problems here. The most obvious is that many of the sources used are not WP:RS. We don't use other wikipedia articles as sources. Twitter is not at WP:RS either. You've also got a citation to just "www.washingtonpost.com", and not to a specific article. Also, please read WP:NPOV and WP:NOTNEWS.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Christopher C. Garrett and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Christopher C. Garrett, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

-- RoySmith (talk) 00:54, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 4byu123! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! -- RoySmith (talk) 00:54, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Christopher C. Garrett has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Christopher C. Garrett. Thanks! -- RoySmith (talk) 22:22, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Christopher C. Garrett (November 13)[edit]

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Frayae was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

— Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 12:04, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Christopher C. Garrett[edit]

Hello, 4byu123. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Christopher C. Garrett".

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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Dolotta (talk) 05:53, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]