User talk:Aqua.107

Welcome!

Hi Aqua.107! 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

Happy editing! Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 11:03, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024

Hello, I'm Bcorr. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, 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 referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Also, I see that from this page's history that this is not the first time you have been warned. BCorr|Брайен 22:46, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Melilla (1694–1696) moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Siege of Melilla (1694–1696). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Annh07 (talk) 12:33, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024

Hello, I'm Hilst. An edit that you recently made seemed to be generated using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or another application using such technology). Text produced by these applications can be unsuitable for an encyclopedia, and output must be carefully checked. I have reverted your edit. If you want to practice editing, 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. Thanks. – Hilst [talk] 20:01, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Ternera. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Invasion of Portugal (1807)—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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Ternera (talk) 14:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Battle of Cape Verde

Hello Aqua.107, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Battle of Cape Verde, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Cape Verde.

Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Hilst}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

– Hilst [talk] 20:40, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about São José Incident of 1674

Hello Aqua.107, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, São José Incident of 1674, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/São José Incident of 1674.

Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Hilst}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

– Hilst [talk] 12:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Battle of Cape São Vicente (1676)

Hello Aqua.107, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Battle of Cape São Vicente (1676), should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Cape São Vicente (1676).

Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Hilst}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

– Hilst [talk] 00:28, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Battle at the Portuguese coast (1723)

Hello, Aqua.107

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Hilst, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've proposed an article that you started, Battle at the Portuguese coast (1723), for deletion because it meets one or more of our deletion criteria, and I don't think that it is suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. The particular issue can be found in the notice that is now visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to contest the deletion:

Edit the page
Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
Click the Publish changes button.

If you object to the article's deletion, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the issues raised in the deletion notice. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Hilst}}. And remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

– Hilst [talk] 10:43, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I blocked User talk:Hdmir. Please don't do that again. Drmies (talk) 20:26, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

Hello, I'm Remsense. I noticed that you recently removed content from Battle of Alcácer Quibir 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. Thanks. Remsense诉 13:54, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Battle of Alcácer Quibir. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. R Prazeres (talk) 15:53, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to make unconstructive edits to Wikipedia using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or another application using such a technology), you may be blocked from editing. Acebulf ^{(talk | contribs)} 01:32, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Battle of Berlengas (1714)

The article Battle of Berlengas (1714) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Single-sourced article. Source doesn't match article contents

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Acebulf ^{(talk | contribs)} 00:43, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. R Prazeres (talk) 17:01, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. R Prazeres (talk) 00:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:12, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BLAR of Siege of Mangalore (1571)

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. A page you created or have recently made significant changes to, Siege of Mangalore (1571), may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for pages, so it has been blanked and redirected to War of the League of the Indies. Three typical reasons for this are that: (1) the article's subject appears to fail our notability guidelines; (2) the article is unsourced; or (3) the sources used in the article are unreliable. The page's history is preserved and it is possible to restore the article: If you believe that this page should remain included on Wikipedia or that this action was taken in error, then you may revert the edit that blanked and redirected the page.

Wikipedia:Your first article has more information about creating articles, and you may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:24, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Siege of Melilla (1694–1696)

Hello, Aqua.107. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Siege of Melilla (1694–1696), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 13:06, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that your recent edit to Portuguese–Safavid wars did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary), and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! C F A 💬 03:20, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved content from Acehnese–Portuguese conflicts into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content (here or elsewhere), Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. C F A 💬 21:08, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Chaul (1570-1571) moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Siege of Chaul (1570-1571). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because No lead at all and no page numbers. . I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. scope_creep^Talk 20:09, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aqua.107. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 16:11, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Naval Battle of Porto (1677)

The article Naval Battle of Porto (1677) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The sole source for this battle is a single sentence. Most of this article is made up fluff to compensate for the lack of coverage. Fails WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:59, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Portuguese Raids on the Coasts of Arabia (1506)

The article Portuguese Raids on the Coasts of Arabia (1506) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:00, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Battle at the Portuguese coast (1726)

The article Battle at the Portuguese coast (1726) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The source material for this article is a single paragraph in two separate sources. Fails WP:GNG, WP:NEVENT.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:03, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]