User talk:Eboshakey

21 November 2021‎
Hello. This is a message to let you know that you have made an edit summary that did not appear to be appropriate, civil or otherwise constructive, and it may have been removed. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Editors are expected to treat each other with respect and civility. On this encyclopedia project, editors assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not appear to do at EWI (musical instrument). Here is Wikipedia's welcome page, and it is hoped that you will assume the good faith of other editors and continue to help us improve Wikipedia! Thank you very much!

Thank you for your contributions. &#8212;&#160;CJDOS,&#160;Sheridan,&#160;OR&#160;(talk) 10:39, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Perhaps my edit summary was not clear, in that some of the edits you performed to the fore mentioned article read as if they were written with a promotional tone (WP:PROMO), with information added through original research (WP:OR). Neither is appropriate, however, I'm not going to revert them because in doing so would be 3 reverts (see WP:EDITWAR). I will instead have someone else take a look and make whatever assessment needs to be made.
 * Please refrain from using the edit summaries to make false accusations of ill-intentions. There is a civil approach that should be utilized. Please familiarize yourself with the Civility and Help:Edit summary pages. Failure to observe civility may result in escalation of this matter.

December 2021
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Reverb effect, you may be blocked from editing. ''Information can only be added to Wikipedia if it's sourced. It doesn't matter if it's true - it must be sourced. Only certain kinds of sources can be used on Wikipedia, and the ones you provided aren't usable. If you want to add this information, please use one of the reliable sources at WP:RSINSTRUMENT, or find it another source and bring it to the source page to see if it can be used. If continue to reinstate your edits, you'll be blocked and then you won't be able to change anything at all.'' Popcornfud (talk) 16:02, 24 December 2021 (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 noticeboards.
 * 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.

March 2024
Hello. I wanted to let you know that your recent edit(s) to List of Magical Negro occurrences in fiction have been removed because you cited the information you added to IMDb. As discussed at WP:RS/IMDb, IMDb is considered a questionable source, and generally should not be used as a sole reference. You are welcome to re-add the information using a different reliable source, or with an additional source confirming the information from IMDb. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 15:58, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello! I'm Doniago. Your recent edit(s) to the page List of Magical Negro occurrences in fiction appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been reverted for now. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. The source you provided (other than IMDb) makes no reference to Pringle's character being a Magical Negro. DonIago (talk) 16:28, 31 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I did not add incorrect information. I did not state that the article stated that information. It cited that he was in it. This is cult British television from decades ago - academic articles aren't going to appear on that. It's extremely blatant from the programme itself.. This is evidently a game that you enjoy - passive aggressive. Your edits really aren't useful just malicious.
 * You can enjoy your game with other people. You win, I won't try again - This one is not important to me.  Eboshakey (talk) 16:36, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Adding someone because you believe them to be a Magical Negro rather than because a reliable source states it is the definition of original research. We go by what reliable sources say, not by our own takeaways and interpretations. DonIago (talk) 00:56, 1 April 2024 (UTC)