User talk:82.9.224.228

September 2018
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Scene (subculture). 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. Regards, User:TheDragonFire300. (Contact me &#124; Contributions). This message was left at 11:23, 24 September 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.

October 2018
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Hipster (contemporary subculture), you may be blocked from editing. Binksternet (talk) 04:37, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Scene (subculture). Jim1138 (talk) 00:23, 17 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Get wp:consensus on talk:Scene (subculture) I suggest you read wp:disruptive editing. Accusing an editor of wp:vandalism when it is not is frowned upon. I suggest you familiarize yourself with the term. Jim1138 (talk) 01:12, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

I don't care if accusing someone is frowned upon or not, and I don't care if the editor is the pope or some other person of previously good character. His edit was vandalism because it removed a lot of useful information, and because it narrowed the article's scope to a purely America centric point of view. The section on Latin America should never have been deleted.

November 2018
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Wings (haircut). Binksternet (talk) 03:05, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at 1970s in Western fashion. - FlightTime  ( open channel ) 03:13, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on User talk:Binksternet ‎. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people.  Acroterion   (talk)   03:14, 24 November 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.

Talkback
- FlightTime  ( open channel ) 03:28, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

February 2019
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page 2010s in fashion has been reverted. Your edit here to 2010s in fashion was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links in references which are discouraged per our reliable sources guideline. The reference(s) you added or changed (https://www.dazeddigital.com/fashion/article/42612/1/2018-2000s-y2k-fashion-style-paris-hilton-juicy-couture-ugg-vetements-burberry) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 20:02, 10 February 2019 (UTC) If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

Edit to hipster
It's not disruptive. Most modern hipster guys have beards and checked shirts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.9.224.228 (talk • contribs)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. 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. Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 19:49, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism
You wrongly claim my edits are vandalism and disruptive, but these citations from the article hipster (contemporary subculture) clearly state that hipsters have beards and wear vintage clothes. The first link from the Guardian even has a picture of a hipster with the same beard, haircut and plaid shirt as the guy in the photo I added.

https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2014/jun/22/end-of-the-hipster-flat-caps-and-beards

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/16/hipster-beard-guys-growing-a-beard

https://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-hipster-beard.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.9.224.228 (talk) 21:27, 28 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I moved the above comment from my talk page to keep the discussion here
 * "hipsters have beards and wear vintage clothes": Obviously that is not what led to my warnings to you. You put in a photo of a Wikipedia editor at a conference writing in the caption that he had a "Hitler's Youth" haircut. I can't begin to tell you the number of guidelines and policies that violates. If you want to propose changes to photos in the article because you believe there are ones that better illustrate typical hipster fashion, that's fine, but that did not appear to be what your agenda was, with this "Hitler's Youth" stuff. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 21:41, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

A haircut that is long on top but shaved on the back and sides is known as a Hitler Youth haircut among contemporary hipsters. These are worn for ironic value, like nerd glasses, and don't have any political significance. See the link below. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/17/fashion/a-haircut-returns-from-the-1930s.html

May 2019
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Cultural appropriation, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. - CorbieV  ☊ ☼ 18:57, 5 May 2019 (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.