User talk:Callum091412

November 2019
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Ivan Toney has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 09:48, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 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: Ivan Toney was changed by Callum091412 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.925403 on 2019-11-06T09:48:41+00:00

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Marcus Maddison. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:32, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Ivan Toney.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:33, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Mohamed Eisa, you may be blocked from editing.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:33, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

February 2020
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Arsenal F.C. has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 21:33, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * 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: Arsenal F.C. was changed by Callum091412 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.87837 on 2020-02-17T21:33:23+00:00

I was telling the truth. That shouldn’t have been removed. Callum091412 (talk) 21:34, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Peterborough United F.C., without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Dirkbb (talk) 21:41, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at FC Duruji Kvareli, you may be blocked from editing. Dirkbb (talk) 21:42, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Heya
Callum091412, I came across your edits to Arsenal F.C. when looking to see if anyone had added Gunnersaurus before (there's a search tool linked from the History page). I plan to add a section in a few hours if nobody else does. I don't believe your edits there were vandalism, and I've told the bot the first one, which it reverted, was a false positive. The thing is, you don't seem to have realised that we require a reliable published source for changes (such as a newspaper article), and that doesn't include personal knowledge. This is called verifiability and is one of our basic rules, since it means the information can be checked, and also since it gives the reader a way to find out more. The source doesn't have to be online, but if for example you use a book or newspaper that you have in a paper copy, you need to include enough details for the reader or a fellow editor to find it: title, author, date, newspaper name, page ... so it's easier to just use URLs. The source is usually made into a footnote by adding it between tags in the text editor or using whatever pull-down the Visual Editor has for making a reference. Also, you shouldn't be using exclamation points or characterising something or someone as great or whatever, because since this is an encyclopaedia, we write things neutrally; this is another of our basic rules, called neutral point-of-view. So we can only report that so-and-so called it great, with a reference, or that it's now generally agreed it was great, with a reference that says that. So these appear to be the two reasons you've been getting reverted and receiving notices criticising your edits; I hope the explanation helps. I've also stuck a welcome template with links to our policies and guidelines and places to ask for help (the bot leaves a space for that but nobody else seems to have thought of it). I hope you'll stay around and enjoy editing here. Yngvadottir (talk) 03:18, 7 October 2020 (UTC)