User talk:Hevvymettle

Welcome!
Hello, Hevvymettle, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Static Dress did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to  The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Introduction tutorial
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need personal help ask me on my talk page, or. Again, welcome. – NJD-DE (talk) 23:10, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Static Dress
Hi, this is regarding our recent interaction on Static Dress. I wanted to let you know that for all the new information you added, I did go through and incorporate with correct citations, such as the tour with Higher Power, the introduction of Contrast and Ogden, their aesthetic and their want to not be categorised. But you didn't add much, you mostly removed and reworded. For example, you removed the entire paragraph talking how the band formed, and instead started it with the release of their first song. Even though that first paragraph was reliably sourced and entirely relevant. I assume it was this kind of stuff that you mean when you said there the article was "a jumbled mess of mostly irrelevant information", because you cut it down to just the release of songs but information about touring history and formation is incredibly relevant. Looking through, I don't see anything that seems irrelevant, it actually seems pretty concise. Feel free to point me towards them and I can either give you advice on how you could improve it or I can do it for you.

Also, I wasn't referring to the press sources as citing "social media", I was referring to sources such as these that you linked:    None of these can be used, as they are links to social media, not WP:RELIABLESOURCES. You did cite quite a few reliable sources, namely many Dead Press articles, but also a lot of them were already cited, and you ended up removing them then adding them back. I hope this all makes sense. It's clear everything was good faith, and I don't doubt you were trying to improve the article, you probably just didn't go around it the best way. Issan Sumisu (talk) 12:30, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Fair dos lad i just didn't like how the information was arranged, my apologies. was just bare vexed because other people on this site are tapped