User talk:Dougw CA

April 2024
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Dorothy Warenskjold have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 22:33, 6 April 2024 (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.
 * If you need help, please see the Introduction to Wikipedia, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, place on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Dorothy Warenskjold was changed by Dougw CA (u) (t) ANN scored at 1 on 2024-04-06T22:33:08+00:00

I am fairly new to Wikipedia editing. Can someone please look at my edits (Dorothy Warenskjold article) that were zapped by the ClueBot NG false positive, & guide me as to what likely triggered it? In redoing them, I wish to avoid a repeat. I wish to state that my edits were benevolently intended & backed by massive research. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougw CA (talk • contribs) 18:18, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I can't see why ClueBot NG saw this as unacceptable. I may have missed something, checking fairly quickly, but on the whole my advice is to regard it as just an odd false positive, and try repeating the edit, with one exception. Saying that something "constitutes an invaluable source" is an expression of opinion or a personal judgement, which a Wikipedia article should not contain,so leave that bit out. JBW (talk) 19:15, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I get it about the "invaluable source" opinion, will do. The other possibilities that had occurred to me are--In the time stamps, tt looks like the bot reacted to the very last published edit, involving the discography.  I had axed some old text due to vintage recording market changes.  Also, I finished it in a hurry, I had to go somewhere, & wonder if I broke anything with a last minute typo.  Speaking of which--I had repeatedly described edits as "fix typo" previously, is that a flag?  Finally--is there any way to remove the one remaining "vandalism" line in the history?  By an admin?  Prominent figures in the San Francisco music scene, at the SF Opera etc. may be looking at my work in this article & a few of them would recognize my name.  Could hurt the overall Warenskjold research project. Dougw CA (talk) 20:02, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Hey Doug, I look after ClueBot so hopefully I can provide some insight.
 * There are many inputs ClueBot takes, age of account/amount of edits, amount of the edit, what gets removed/added etc. That then goes though it's AI like process to spit out a result of 'it's okay' or 'It's not okay'.
 * If the latter, it uses the WP:ROLLBACK process to deal with it, annoyingly sometimes hitting more than it should just by the way rollback works (it reverts every edit by that user since anyone else edited).
 * In relation to 'I had repeatedly described edits as "fix typo" previously, is that a flag?', it can be, we see many a vandalism misuse that edit summary, I would suggest not using it and always describe the edits succinctly, such as the one you did previously 'add personal life section with additional reference'.
 * ClueBot will not revert another edit on that page in the next 24 hours. In this instance, I have rolled back ClueBot's edit which has restored yours, however, I would suggest editing again per JBW's advice - Rich T&#124;C&#124;E-Mail 20:11, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you so very much for your assistance. The rollback/24 hour blanking window has saved me a serious amount of work and worry! Dougw CA (talk) 21:53, 7 April 2024 (UTC)