User talk:EEEEEE1

Welcome!
Hello, EEEEEE1, 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: 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 ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! BracketBot (talk) 23:48, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
 * 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

July 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=617113500 your edit] to Merkel-Raute may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:48, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
 * File:Dmitry Medvedev at the 34th G8 Summit 7-9 July 2008-43.jpg|thumb|upright|right|British Prime

Gamergate notification
Johnuniq (talk) 23:35, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

July 2015
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Frankfurt School. 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. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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. Liz  Read! Talk! 16:07, 30 July 2015 (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.

You think something needs to be changed.
That's great. However, you shouldn't just go ahead with removing information. It would be best if you instead worked out your proposal and introduced it to other editors on a talk page. That may not always get you what you want, but it is better than back-and-forth reverting, and it is far less likely to get you blocked. Dustin ( talk ) 16:08, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Echo Fox, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kirby. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:53, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

July 2023
Please stop edit warring on Tyranny of small decisions. You have been repeatedly asked to apply some thought to the change you keep trying to enforce in this article, given that it is not appropriate in the context where you are making it. If you actually read what the article talks about just before the quaint change you keep attempting to make, you will see the article is giving examples of "independent pin prick decisions". You mechanically keep reinserting your "canals, villages and roads", because, from the guideline you refer to, you apparently think you have found a more formal tone, and anything more formal is better. Well there are plenty of other considerations which are equally or more important in writing Wikipedia articles, such as actually illustrating what is being talked about instead of trying to substitute an inappropriate list because it satisfies your sense of what you think is more "formal". That is not improving Wikipedia – it is vandalising it. — Epipelagic (talk) 07:55, 11 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I'm putting it inside the rules. If you don't like it, then improve it instead of making it outside the rules again. e (talk) 13:31, 11 July 2023 (UTC)


 * What "rules" are you talking about? You have mentioned, and only in a general way, some explanatory essay about a Wikipedia guideline. That essay does not in any way support the garbled rewrite you are trying to perpetrate. Your rewrite damages the article by failing to get the point it is meant to illustrate.
 * In any case, you should read the Wikipedia policy about policies and guidelines, where it says: "Although Wikipedia generally does not employ hard-and-fast rules, Wikipedia's policy and guideline pages describe its principles and agreed-upon best practices. Policies are standards all users should normally follow, and guidelines are generally meant to be best practices for following those standards in specific contexts. Policies and guidelines should always be applied using reason and common sense."
 * Specifically, what "rules" do you imagine you are referring to. Given the context, there is no rule that covers the change you are trying to make – your reference to "formal tone" is nonsense. – Epipelagic (talk) 15:10, 11 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I see you have reverted yet again without responding to my comment above. I have asked for an assessment of what is happening here at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents — Epipelagic (talk) 17:32, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I've protected the page for 10 days. I strongly suggest you take it to the talk page. If the edit warning continues, further sanctions may be applied, such as blocking. - jc37 17:54, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 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 2023 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) 00:44, 28 November 2023 (UTC)