User talk:82.13.176.207

November 2021[edit]

Hello, I'm WikiLinuz. I noticed that you recently removed content from List of Coronation Street characters 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 the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. WikiLinuz (talk) 21:55, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

I did. I explained in the edit summary box that the character Tony Haywood had now made his onscreen appearance so the list could be updated and there was no further need for the source.82.13.176.207 (talk) 22:01, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of former Coronation Street characters. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. – DarkGlow • 20:49, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Which particular edits do you mean? I have made several on that page. If any edits I made were disruptive then I apologize. That wasn't my intention. I always try to make my edits constructive.82.13.176.207 (talk) 12:48, 2 January 2022 (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! Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

I am using the edit summary box. I'm sorry if it wasn't clear enough.82.13.176.207 (talk) 16:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Telford, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. We don't automatically remove each redlink. David Biddulph (talk) 17:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am using the edit summary. Do I not go into enough detail about why I removed them or something?82.13.176.207 (talk) 18:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read Wikipedia:Red link? If you remove what appears to be a viable redlink, you should explain why. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I will explain. I was removing them because there are no pages with the exact title of the Orange links on Wikipedia. There might never be either. Are the links being kept there in the hope that in the future, there will be pages created about those particular items? If not then it is pointless to have the hyperlinks if they don't go anywhere.82.13.176.207 (talk) 18:14, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For the third time, please read Wikipedia:Red link. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:16, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of information on that page but from what I could gather, to sum up, a red link is added in case an article or page is created with the title in order to help any readers gain context about another connected article they are reading? Is that correct?82.13.176.207 (talk) 18:23, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 2022[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Hi, please do not remove citations needed content without a thorough search for sources. Atlantic306 (talk) 22:30, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Which particular edits do you class as "unconstructive" or "disruptive"? I've made a lot. You may need to narrow it down a bit.82.13.176.207 (talk) 14:32, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at John Dickman, you may be blocked from editing. Oopsemoops (talk) 17:28, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

There was some unsourced information on the page. Can you add a source for the information that I removed then?82.13.176.207 (talk) 17:29, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Charlie Dimmock, you may be blocked from editing. Vandalism has been noted as unexplained removal of {{citation needed}} templates at Charlie Dimmock and Manchester Martyrs.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 21:34, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So firstly I get accused of disruptive editing because I remove unsourced material then again when I remove the citation needed boxes which highlight the fact that the material is unsourced? Which is it supposed to be?82.13.176.207 (talk) 22:16, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Either the unsourced material should be removed or sources should be added to back up the information. You can't have it both ways.82.13.176.207 (talk) 22:18, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of what you're arguing depends upon WP:AGF and dates; assume good faith dictates that contributions could be reasonable and accurate, but need help from others. If the date is recent, leave it longer. If the date is old, the content could be removed - but don't remove the {{citation needed}} maintenance tag and leave in situ the text that was the cause for adding the tag. What you did - as observed by myself on just a few articles - was disruptive by removing the templates and leaving the content.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 23:32, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the dates were very old. I also thought if the article was about a real person then any unsourced material could be potentially libellous or slanderous if uncorrobated.82.13.176.207 (talk) 00:23, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022[edit]

Hello, I'm Ctrlwiki. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they 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 Teahouse. Thanks. —Ctrlwiki (talk) 10:24, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you are talking about Coronation Street, Linda has now left the show again. Her departure came about in Friday's episode.82.13.176.207 (talk) 19:29, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of EastEnders characters. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Double Plus Ungood (talk) 19:14, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

There are no sources for the character of DCI Peter Arthurs like there are for the other characters on that list. Someone needs to add one.82.13.176.207 (talk) 21:59, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion for Murder of Sarah Payne[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing—Murder of Sarah Payne—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 19:32, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Hello! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. You are welcome to edit anonymously; however, creating an account is free and has several benefits (for example, the ability to create pages, upload media and edit without one's IP address being visible to the public).

Create an account

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

Happy editing! Swaggalicious (talk) 20:34, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.