User talk:Cyclonical

Hi!
Hello, TheWikiCyclone. Since I seem to be the first person apart from yourself to post to this page, let me start by welcoming you to contributing to Wikipedia. You have been making a fair number of small but helpful contributions,  so thank you for that. I see that quite a number of your edits have added links from one article to another ("Wikilinks"). Most of those edits have been good, and you have also improved some existing links, such as replacing "southeastern Georgia" with "southeastern Georgia", which is definitely better. However, once or twice you have done what is known as "overlinking", which is a very common mistake among new editors, so it may help to give you some explanation of this.

Generally speaking, a wikilink should be added only if it provides information which is likely to help readers of the article in which the link is placed to understand content of that article, or provide further information closely connected to content of that article. That normally means either a link to an article which explains words or expressions in the article containing the link, or a link to an article which provides background information which is necessary in order to understand content of the article containing the link. Linking to articles in other situations is not just unnecessary, it can actually be harmful, because research has established that the more irrelevant, or only slightly relevant, links there are in a page, the less likely readers are to find the ones which they might find useful. Thus, for example, nobody reading the article NOMESCO is likely to need to consult the article knowledge in order to understand what "knowledge" means, nor does the article knowledge contain any information about NOMESCO, so linking the one to the other is not likely to be helpful. JBW (talk) 17:21, 29 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Hmm. I do not remember linking to such articles; I was intending to fix a redirect that was inside the sequence. My assumption is that I messed up on choosing which revision is to be put into place because there was an edit conflict. TheWikiCyclone (talk) 17:39, 29 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Yes, I've now looked back at the editing history, and it looks very likely that that was what happened. JBW (talk) 21:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I still however make the mistake of putting excessive wikilinks inside articles. It takes a while to work on the skill of editing, so thank you for your input. TheWikiCyclone (talk) 20:38, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, TheWikiCyclone. Thank you for your work on This aint love. Voorts, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

voorts (talk/contributions) 04:02, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Your edit on Fort Ancient
Nice catch on the MOS order of hidden tags on Fort Ancient. — Yogabear2020 (N.B. NoviceEditor; Talk) 14:39, 16 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Yea I tend to notice a lot of these on articles so I try to fix them when possible TheWikiCyclone (talk) 18:23, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Revert my undos on the NBA Teams Record
Hi,

Kindly revert what you did to the NBA teams record, you clearly did not read what the edits that I have undo-ed.

FraudEdits (talk) 23:19, 12 July 2024 (UTC)


 * @FraudEdits Okay, I apologize if I did anything wrong. Since I'm pretty new to reverting vandalism, I sometimes may mistake good-faith edits for vandalism. The reason is because you were rapidly reverting edits and just recently made your account, so I got suspicious, and reverted all your edits and put a user warning on your talk page. You are free to undo my edits; the other edits you were reverting did not have a source so you are right. Cyclonical (talk) 23:30, 12 July 2024 (UTC)