User talk:HenriDeadMort

January 2021
Hello, I'm Hrodvarsson. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Dimebag Darrell, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. We can't use fandom/wikia type sites as references on Wikipedia as they are user-generated content. Hrodvarsson (talk) 22:40, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

March 2022
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 White genocide conspiracy theory, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. ''Using contractions is against our manual of style. Please see MOS:CONTRACTIONS.'' Peaceray (talk) 17:43, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Fluvoxamine
You have repeatedly tried to force this information into the Fluvoxamine and have been reverted each time. The onus is on you to get talk page consensus for the inclusion of the disputed content instead of restoring it.--  Ponyo bons mots 23:27, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * You're still doing this. You must get WP:CONSENSUS for this disputed content, which has been reverted by multiple editors over a period of months. If you restore it again, you will likely find yourself blocked for long-term edit warring.-- Ponyo bons mots 20:06, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
 * But it's the other way around, consensus should be proved for the NON-inclusion, as the information removed stayed for a long time without being tampered with... HenriDeadMort (talk) 22:01, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
 * That's not how Wikipedia works. The onus is on the individual wanting to include disputed content to get consensus for its inclusion. -- Ponyo bons mots 22:05, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
 * "disputed"
 * by 2 people...
 * That's like if I removed (as an example) the footnote on the Risperidone page, because a single source is disputable and thus needs consensus for its inclusion... HenriDeadMort (talk) 23:37, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The material was disputed and removed. Find consensus for inclusion before putting it back in, and stop edit-warring after being advised of the requirement for consensus.That's a fundamental requirement of the encyclopedia. Please read WP:UNDUE. There is also the tangential nature of the mention with no context. The inclusion of the material carried an implied negative connotation that seems like an inappropriate emphasis on a coincidence, without any evidence of any broad issue as discussed in reliable sources.  Acroterion   (talk)   23:05, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

January 2024
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Venus (Shocking Blue song). Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. - FlightTime  ( open channel ) 21:26, 22 January 2024 (UTC)


 * How exactly is it unconstructive?
 * I was reading that page, and I saw the paragraph that preceded my edit and it explicitly mentioned the band "Dead Or Alive", therefore my edit switching the hyperlink from the band "D.O.A" to "Dead Or Alive" very relevant, and to avoid any confusion I added a footnote just in case.
 * I will be reverting your revert, if you think the footnote is disruptive, feel free to remove it, but the hyperlink should be changed to "Dead Or Alive" to accurately reflect the article. HenriDeadMort (talk) 21:30, 22 January 2024 (UTC)