User talk:Amanofpolitics

Welcome!
Hello, Amanofpolitics, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:


 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! John Maynard Friedman (talk) 13:44, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

October 2019
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Jeremy Hunt, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. David Biddulph (talk) 17:50, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Home Secretary
The article on this post is at Home Secretary. The formal name is almost never used. Please stop your changes. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:26, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Foreign Secretary
The Commonwealth was only established in 1926 so the 1st Duke of Wellington cannot have been Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. Dormskirk (talk) 17:58, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

October 2019
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington‎; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that 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. Favonian (talk) 15:03, 17 October 2019 (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.

November 2019
Your recent editing history at Harriet Harman shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:13, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Unspecified source/license for File:Boris Johnson Official.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Boris Johnson Official.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like (to release all rights),  (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * File copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 19:45, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Tommy Robinson
He was appointed by Batten to, I believe, a paid post, but he was not actually a member. UKIP's rules (then at least) actually banned him from being a member. You have a point about Independent.

Incidentally, when you post on a talk page you should sign your contributions. Use 4 tildes ( ~ symbol) to automatically add you name, the time and date. Emeraude (talk) 17:58, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

November 2019
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

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:


 * User contributions
 * Recent changes
 * Watchlists
 * Revision differences
 * IRC channels
 * Related changes
 * New pages list
 * Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting. ''Please use your edit summaries, and please quit changing official portraits. From now on, if it’s not explained, your edits will be seen as vandalism.'' Corky  16:58, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Credentials
Per MOS:Credential, the guidance is Academic and professional titles (such as "Dr." or "Professor"), including honorary ones, should be used in a Wikipedia article only when the subject is widely known by a pseudonym or stage name containing such a title (whether earned or not). In this case, it may be included in the pseudonym as described above (e.g. Ruth Westheimer, better known as Dr. Ruth ...). However, verifiable facts about how a person attained his or her title should be included in the article. The edits that you're making are contrary to this guideline; please stop. Schazjmd  (talk)  20:55, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

June 2020
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Stephen Kingsley, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:05, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

February 2021
Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. Thanks! power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 02:41, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Murder of Libby Squire moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Murder of Libby Squire, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CommanderWaterford (talk) 08:21, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Murder of Libby Squire (February 14)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dan arndt 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:Murder of Libby Squire 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:Murder of Libby Squire, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "Db-g7" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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:Murder_of_Libby_Squire Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dan_arndt&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Murder_of_Libby_Squire reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dan arndt (talk) 02:38, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Murder of Libby Squire
Hello, Amanofpolitics. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Murder of Libby Squire, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Murder of Libby Squire


Hello, Amanofpolitics. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Murder of Libby Squire".

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 02:38, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)