User talk:198.151.8.4

June 2012
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is invited to contribute, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Pete von Reichbauer, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Allens (talk &#124; contribs) 19:36, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

May 2013
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one of your recent edits to Juliet Sorensen has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.


 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Juliet Sorensen was changed by 198.151.8.4 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.859873 on 2013-05-03T19:36:14+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 19:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

September 2013
Hello, I'm Excirial. I noticed that you recently removed some content from SAIC (U.S. company), with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 18:19, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

February 2014
Hello, I'm Epicgenius. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Linton, Indiana because it did not appear constructive. 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. Epicgenius (talk) 17:07, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

March 2014
Hello, I'm Smalljim. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Effects of Hurricane Sandy in Maryland and Washington, D.C., because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. —S MALL JIM   16:37, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

August 2017
Hello, I'm Name goes here. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Koffi Olomide have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Name goes here (talk | contribs) 17:04, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Fally Ipupa. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Name goes here (talk | contribs) 17:05, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Chairman of the Board of Veterans' Appeals has been accepted
 Chairman of the Board of Veterans' Appeals, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Sulfurboy (talk) 18:16, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Chairman_of_the_Board_of_Veterans%27_Appeals help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.
 * note: Your article has since been merged into Board of Veterans' Appeals, as of 27 November 2017. Thank you for contributions. If you wish to continue work on that material, you can find it here. - the WOLF  child  08:48, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: James P. Terry (December 19)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

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:James P. Terry 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:James P. Terry, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "db-self" at the top of the draft text and save.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:James_P._Terry Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Theroadislong&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:James_P._Terry reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 15:45, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Eligah Dane Clark (January 7)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KJP1 was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

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:Eligah Dane Clark 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:Eligah Dane Clark, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "db-self" at the top of the draft text and save.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Eligah_Dane_Clark Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:KJP1&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Eligah_Dane_Clark reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KJP1 (talk) 07:50, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

February 2018
Hello, I'm Serols. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Interstellar (film)— because it did not appear constructive. 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. Serols (talk) 19:55, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

June 2018
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at The Postman (film). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you.  The Old Jacobite The '45 12:41, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

National varieties of English
Hello. In a recent edit to the page Waterfall model, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:25, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * 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.

December 2019
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Citrus Bowl. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Dmoore5556 (talk) 22:04, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

March 2020
Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Cousin. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Dorsetonian (talk) 17:12, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * 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.

More broken redirects to Cousin
Hello, Thanks for making so many updates to the redirects that go to the Cousin article before removing that "Removed" anchor. It looks like the WP:Broken redirects list was only partial, and there are more (not just to a #Removed anchor) listed here: https://dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/rdcheck.py?page=Cousin. I just point this out to you since you seem to have an interest in the page. I was just going for a quick fix that appeared relevant in my edit. Anyway, thanks for the cleanup help! --2pou (talk) 02:27, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * first thank you in over 14 years198.151.8.4 (talk) 11:19, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

April 2020
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. El_C 12:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Removal of "three-quarter sibling" from Sibling page
Hello. I was looking for Wikipedia's explanation of sibling-cousins a.k.a. three-quarter siblings, and I couldn't find it, although I did find a mention on Wiktionary that had a link to a now-deleted section of the Sibling article. Some investigation revealed you had removed the section and reinstated the removal after it was reverted rather than discuss it as the reverter had requested.

There are two points I wish to make here.

1) Reverting a reversion without discussing it, in all but a few special cases, is considered a form of edit-warring and strongly discouraged on this site. It is discouraged because it leaves pages in the state desired by the most persistent individual editor, rather than in a state the community can agree on.

2) By removing the mention of this from the Sibling article, you created a lacuna in Wikipedia - no Wikipedia article currently describes this relationship despite its being relatively well-known (and referred to by a now-broken link on a sister project). Removing something from an article where it doesn't belong is all well and good, but if it's notable it needs to be discussed somewhere and you should check for this before removing sections of articles wholesale.

I actually agree that "three-quarter sibling" is a terrible name for this relationship, and am not sure where would be best to cover it ("Sibling" and/or "Cousin" are the obvious choices, although there may be some other relevant page of which I am unaware). However, wholesale removing a chunk of an article, leaving a hole in Wikipedia, and then ignoring a request for discussion in favour of brute-force reinstatement, is not a good solution. (I will note that had you discussed this rather than re-reverting, the concept's lack of coverage elsewhere would almost certainly have been raised.)

I would ask that you use a little more caution when improving articles. Bold edits are great (though as I said, it's worth checking for lacuna issues in the specific case of deleting large sections of articles), but if you get reverted - even for a reason that doesn't seem very valid on the surface - you need to discuss things to make sure you're not missing something.

(And for the record, I've made the mistake of ignoring an "invalid" revert reason and re-reverting myself; it's easy to do in the heat of the moment. In at least one case I was also missing something and in hindsight I should have discussed it first. Remember - there's no harm in talking.) Magic9mushroom (talk) 08:18, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Used in everyday life


Hello, 198.151.8.4. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Used in everyday life".

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 and remove the, , or  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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Extraordinary Writ (talk) 20:29, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

May 2022
Hello, I'm 0xDeadbeef. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Kelli Johnson 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. 0x Deadbeef  (T C) 01:13, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

January 2023
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Chris Beard. 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: 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. Cerebral726 (talk) 20:30, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

August 2023
Hello, I'm Felida97. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Generation Alpha—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. Felida97 (talk) 18:13, 1 August 2023 (UTC)