User talk:Sacchipersempr

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Sacchipersempr! Thank you for your contributions. I am Marek69 and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Marek.69 ^talk 22:28, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

January 2015

Hello, I'm Robert McClenon. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Mars without 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; I restored the removed content. 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. Unexplained removal of references Robert McClenon (talk) 14:47, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2015

Hello, I'm EncMstr. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you unlinked one or more redlinks. Often redlinks can be helpful, so we don't remove them just because they are red. They help improve Wikipedia by attracting editors to create needed articles.

In addition, clicking on the "What links here" special link (in the Wikipedia Toolbox at left) on a missing article shows how many—and which—articles depend on that article being created. This can help prioritize article creation. Redlinks are useful! Please, only remove a redlink if you are pretty sure that it is to a non-notable topic and not likely ever to be created. Thanks! —EncMstr (talk) 19:00, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qed237. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Inter Milan without 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; I restored the removed content. 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. Thanks. Qed237 (talk) 12:30, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to Colonization of Mars does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 13:03, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Redlinks without Edit Summaries

Your contribution history to Wikipedia appears to consist of the removal of redlinks, usually without edit summaries. Sometimes redlinks are desirable to indicate that an article is needed. Edit summaries should always be used, especially because the unexplained removal of content (even of redlinks) is often a form of vandalism. In your case it appears that you are on a campaign, in good faith, but without consensus, to clean up Wikipedia by removing the ugly redlinks. Since this is the only editing that you do, at least you should use edit summaries, or you may be blocked. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:06, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the editors above that redlinks to things which warrant articles should not be deleted. Please see Wikipedia:Red link. --Macrakis (talk) 21:32, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Polenta

In a recent edit to polenta, you removed a source reference. Though I agree this is a poor source, you should always explain actions like this in the edit comment. --Macrakis (talk) 21:42, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015

Hello, I'm TheFarix. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Case Closed without 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; I restored the removed content. 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. Thanks. —Farix (t | c) 21:55, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning: Redlinks and edit summaries

This your final warning. You have already been warned at least three times about removing redlinks and making other edits without any rationale: not using article talk pages, not providing an edit summary, and not discussing the type of edits you make at a related forum (WikiProject, Village Pump, etc.)

If you do this again, you will be blocked. —EncMstr (talk) 03:37, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Inter Milan, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Qed237 (talk) 18:12, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. —EncMstr (talk) 07:12, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Italy national under-15 football team

The article Italy national under-15 football team has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Per reasons given at this related discussion; no evidence of meeting WP:GNG and below the level that would normally receive significant media coverage. I don't see how this is notable. Playing in a bunch of youth camps and Christmas tournaments and being a feeder to the under-16 team is not notable.

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. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:23, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]