User talk:70.76.12.245

December 2020
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Melina Perez. 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. Felida97 (talk) 19:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

January 2021
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Mary Sue has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. Sangdeboeuf (talk) 20:56, 16 January 2021 (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.

Hello, I'm Sangdeboeuf. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Cara Dune 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. ''Please refer to the concept of television criticism. Whether any Wikipedia user finds sourced material "weird" is not sufficient grounds for removal. Wikipedia does not censor material just because someone finds it offensive. Thank you.'' Sangdeboeuf (talk) 02:05, 19 January 2021 (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.


 * I don't disagree with you about the Cara Dune article, and I think maybe some of those details will be trimmed back in time, but when you were reverted you should have started a talk page discussion. You'll need to find some specific policies to justify your position. Start with WP:RS are the sources reliable? Are they WP:RSPS reliable for this topic in particular (if they aren't film or television critics why should they be included, etc). Maybe WP:UNDUE weight is being put on social media commentary again?
 * If you're willing to discuss it and make your specific objections clear you might be able to get a neutral WP:3RD party to agree with you, or at least get some cleanup of the fluffier bits. It is going to be difficult because some of the things you seem to be disagreeing with have been in the article since before it was evaluated and managed to pass GOOD ARTICLE status. -- 109.78.195.140 (talk) 03:07, 29 January 2021 (UTC)