User talk:95.224.95.166

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but we cannot accept original research. 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. Materialscientist (talk) 06:57, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Let's talk
Hello. I've noticed your repeated edits at the article list of socialist states and I have been trying to contact you for some time, but you never responded. I disagree with major aspects of your edits (especially the removal of times and dates), so I have reverted them. I do not understand why you wish to make these changes, so let's talk about them. Wikipedia works based on consensus and compromise. When editors disagree - like we do - then we are supposed to talk, explain our respective ideas, and reach an agreement. Usually it is not difficult to reach an agreement. I'm certainly open to being persuaded. The only thing I strongly oppose is the removal of times and dates. So, why don't we talk? Tell me what you want to achieve, so that I will understand the purpose of your edits. Then I will tell you my concerns, and we will discuss things and agree on something instead of endlessly editing back and forth.

If you have never had a discussion on wikipedia before, it works like this: Start a new paragraph after my comments, begin with : for proper formatting, and then write your comment. End with ~, which will sign your comment. Like this. KS79 (talk) 17:56, 19 January 2018 (UTC)


 * This is an example of a reply. To respond to me, do what I just did in this last edit. KS79 (talk) 17:59, 19 January 2018 (UTC)


 * If you don't want your changes to be undone by other editors, you have to discuss them and explain what you want to achieve. It takes a lot less effort to discuss things than to make the same changes over and over again. At the moment, I simply don't know why you are making these changes, and they really seem to be reducing the quality of the article. I'm not opposed to you, I simply don't know what you want. So talk to me. Please. -- KS79 (talk) 04:24, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

January 2019
Hello, I'm A Poor Historian. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Tiangong-2, 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. If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ― A Poor Historian (talk) 10:40, 28 January 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.

July 2019 removal of File:Space station size comparison.svg
Hello. I just noticed that you removed the File:Space station size comparison.svg image from the Space station article in January with the summary "adjusted as not entirely accurate" (diff). If you let me know the inaccuracies, I'll put in the time to update it. T.Shafee(Evo &#38; Evo)talk 10:24, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello! Please stop removing diagrams from Space station without explanation or discussion. Your habit of concealing these edits with false summaries is extremely unhelpful. Tiangong-2 is now expected to be deorbited in the next day or so, so very soon the program will actually end; until that actually happens, please stop trying to change this article (and, when it does happen, a reliable source will be needed to confirm the news of its deorbit). Thank you! -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 12:46, 19 July 2019 (UTC)