User talk:EricaL2003

November 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Melissa Joan Hart, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Also, the Internet Movie Database (IMDb) is not a reliable source. Elizium23 (talk) 20:21, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok, you're right. I'm sorry.

January 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Rachel Nichols (actress) has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Logan Talk Contributions 21:46, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

The recent edit you made to Rachel Nichols constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Logan Talk Contributions 21:47, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In Samantha Morton, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Minority Report (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line 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) 13:37, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Your recent rewrite of Paris Hilton
Hi. I noticed you recently made massive changes to Paris Hilton, basically rewriting the article. One thing I noticed is that there is no longer any reference to "Tinkerbell," Hilton's famous dog, so I suspect there may be other information that didn't get retained. Accordingly, I placed a message about it on the article's talk page. I would encourage you to make a comment. In the future, you should make some comment on the talk page yourself when doing such massive changes to a highly visible article, or at least you should leave an edit summary. You can leave comments at Talk:Paris Hilton. Thanks. — JmaJeremy • Ƭalk • Cont   05:15, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I have reverted your massive changes of Paris Hilton as they seem to be unproductive.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:42, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Any massive changes should be discussed in the talk page and reach consensus before doing the edits. You should know this as you have been active on Wikipedia for quite a while.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:45, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Your version look like something from a gossip magazine at times to be perfectly honest. Bring it up on the talk page before changing reverting it back again. Such major changes without community consensus will often lead to reverts of the edits. Sound's to me like you are a fan of Ms Hilton and that reflects in your edit's. Cheers.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:49, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
— JmaJeremy • Ƭalk • Cont   21:47, 12 July 2012 (UTC) Replied back — JmaJeremy • Ƭalk • Cont   22:35, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Reply #3 — JmaJeremy • Ƭalk • Cont   04:51, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

July 2012
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Paris Hilton, makes articles harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ''Articles must not include "gossip" style content as this is an encyclopaedia and not a magazine gossip column. Please refrain from making similar edits in future.  Wesley  Mouse''  22:35, 18 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I second this, and would add that you should gain consensus on the article talk page before making major revisions to articles. ~Adjwilley (talk) 00:50, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

A little friendly advice
Erica, I saw your post today about wanting to improve the Paris Hilton article, work on a team, and getting along, and I wanted to say that I'm glad you decided to come back and gave Wikipedia another shot. If you don't mind me giving a little advice, (though I may have said some of this on the article talk page), might I recommend that you take things in small bites this time? Make sure that you only do one thing per edit, and try not to make too many changes at the same time. In other words, if you want to swap out a picture for another and rewrite a paragraph, swap the picture in one edit, with an edit summary of why the new picture is more appropriate. Then tackle the paragraph a couple sentences at a time, each time, stating why your sentence improves the article. If you take it in small chunks like this, others will be less likely to revert, and more likely to improve on any problems that you might have with the "gossip tone" or prose or spelling. And if somebody has serious problems with one of your edits, then you'll be able to have a focused discussion on the article talk page, because your edit was focused (as opposed to rewriting several sections of the article, in which case it's hard to discuss specifics).

And, if you have any questions about editing, policy, etc., please don't hesitate to contact me here or on my talk page. If you want to contact me here, just write me a note and put an "@Adjwilley" in the edit summary, since I have you on my watchlist. Or, you can write on my talkpage and that will get my attention for sure. ~Adjwilley (talk) 20:39, 23 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much. That means a lot. I'll do my best to improve Wikipedia. EricaL2003 (talk) 17:14, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Paris Hilton
Why did you remove those nice sections that you made? I think we were coming along well with them. Once we get the sections sorted out then we can improve the article more. I added it to the peer review list as well for input. I also found this handy page: TPA WP has many of these all over.--Canoe1967 (talk) 23:22, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Peer review/Paris Hilton/archive1--Canoe1967 (talk) 23:24, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Amazing! :D thank you so much.EricaL2003 (talk) 23:27, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You are very welcome.

I just went by the flickr date. Feel free to correct it.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:10, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sounds fine with me. I just stuffed it in the section that matched the date. Does it seem a little dark to you? The graphics lab may remove the red-eye and I also asked about the brightness.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:22, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * We can't use any image we find on the net though. Flickr has ones with 'free license'. You need to use advanced search there and tick the 3 commons license boxes near the bottom to search for that type.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:35, 27 July 2012 (UTC)


 * http://www.flickr.com/search/advanced/?
 * I have to say that you have improved your editing skills and listen's too suggestions now. Improvements are always welcomed. Cheers.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:51, 27 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much, i'm trying my best :) EricaL2003 (talk) 16:00, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

September 2012
Hello, I'm Webclient101. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Paris Hilton without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. The removed content has been restored. 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. ''(Note) Why did you remove content on Paris Hilton without a reason? You may undo my edit if you have a reason. Thank you.'' Webclient101 (talk) 23:18, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

November 2012
Hi, I am sorry to have to inform you that you have again edited the Paris Hilton article in a gossip magazine article way. And your edits has been reverted. You can not and should not edit this article further without properly knowing how to do proper Wikipedia edits. Sincerely.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:09, 23 November 2012 (UTC)


 * No, i don't think i did. Removing irrelevant info and unnecessary quotes is not, at least for me, a gossip tone edition. Write EVERY SINGLE THING i did in my latest edition that had a gossip tone. I accept i've done a lot of gossip magazine-like editions, but i think i've changed a little bit about writing in wikipedia. I'm just trying to make this article better (check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review/Paris_Hilton/archive1)... I don't wanna have problems with ANYBODY in here. Before having any kind of issues with you or anyone else, i prefer leaving Wikipedia. Have a nice day, bye. EricaL2003 (talk) 20:22, 23 November 2012 (UTC)


 * No, i'm not leaving. I love "working" in here :) EricaL2003 (talk) 15:32, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * No need for overreactions we I don't have a problem with you. I just want you again to not write the Hilton article in "a massive success", "she won this and this award for being a great person", "paris hilton said this and this about that person"- kind of way. Cheers.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:16, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to Paris Hilton does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Wesley ♦Mouse 19:49, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Paris Hilton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nick Carter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:01, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Last time
This is the last time I want to remind you that the Paris Hilton article is not a gossip magazine column. Not for "rumours of romances" etc. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:02, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

January 2013
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistent disruptive editing, as you did at Paris Hilton. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Black Kite (talk) 15:55, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Why
Hi, why do you continue to go against the advice from your fellow editors? We have suggested to you in a nice tone that you dont edit the Paris Hilton as drastically that you have done so far, removing/adding huge parts of the article. I had to report you for what I percieve as disruptive editing and you are now not able to edit Wikipedia for a week. I have to say that I am disappointed that your own actions led to this block but here we are. I suggest you take this week to look trough the Wikipedia guidelines on editing and style of editing. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:01, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi
Hi, good to see you back and you seem to have learned more about appropriate editing which has really improved. However I will let you know that I will keep your edits on Sarah Michelle Gellar under observation for a while so you dont fall back into your "gossip tone" ways. Thanks and happy editing.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:15, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sarah Michelle Gellar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Kelly (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:58, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

What did I tell you?
Erica, have you totally forgot about what I told you earlier about doing massive edits on the Paris Hilton article?. It is time to start to take advice serious my friend.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:25, 17 June 2013 (UTC)


 * You're right. I actually have my doubts about my latest edit on the Paris Hilton article.EricaL2003 (talk) 20:21, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * BabbaQ drew my attention to your editing, and I have to say I agree with him. Your latest edits to the article are clearly written in a gossip magazine style, not the encyclopedic tone Wikipedia articles should have.  I suggest you self-revert and take your ideas to the talkpage; there may be something of value in them (I couldn't tell you, I know nothing about Paris Hilton and have a general distaste for Hollywood and equivalents), but putting it up for discussion may result in better wording.  The Blade of the Northern Lights  ( 話して下さい ) 00:22, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Welcome back
Welcome back. But please, Do not start doing massive edits again. You will risk being blocked unfortunatly as your editing style is a bit over the top at times. Anyways good luck. :)--BabbaQ (talk) 20:47, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Blocked
I've blocked you from editing. People have tried multiple times to address concerns with your editing and you have failed to comply. John Reaves 18:22, 2 December 2013 (UTC)