User talk:Hist4ian

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: 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 have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on. Again, welcome! ~Super Hamster  Talk Contribs 04:15, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

September 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Mondegreen, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. KillerChihuahua ?!?Advice 01:58, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Geek with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. RA talkcontribs 02:02, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

April 2012
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Nerd, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. --jpgordon:==( o ) 01:50, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Please stop adding stuff to Nerd without citing your sources. Your sources have to be reliable. You're also edit warring (although being involved I'm really in no position to warn you about that).--Jasper Deng (talk) 02:26, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Short people listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Short people. Since you had some involvement with the Short people redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). SQGibbon (talk) 03:27, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Your edits
Hello. This is in response to your messages on my talk page. Looking through your history I see that quite a few other editors have found some of your edits problematical -- it's not just me. Your enthusiasm for improving Wikipedia is to be commended and we're all grateful that editors like you take an active interest in making Wikipedia better. Unfortunately some of your edits don't always fit in well with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. For instance several of your edits that have been reverted have been done so because they appear to be original research (click to read about original research). Basically you make claims that might be true but you haven't supplied reliable independent sources to back up those claims. In the recent situation with the Religious discrimination article your edit appeared rather dubious to me and since you did not supply a source backing up your claim reverting it seemed like the best option. If you do not know how to add citations to articles you can always ask me how to do so on my talk page.

Additionally sometimes your prose isn't quite as good as it could be. Sometimes you're a bit too casual or the text you add is awkwardly placed. In cases like this if you at least supplied a source for you claim then editors would be far more likely to fix your prose than just revert it.

Finally, yes, there are lots and lots of problems throughout Wikipedia. The problem is that I cannot possibly fix all of them. Does this mean I shouldn't try to fix any of them? Of course not. It just so happens that many of the articles you edit are on my watchlist so I see many of your edits and then review them. Some I revert; some I leave as is. We all fix things where we can.

If you have any questions or comments you can reach me on my talk page. Thanks. SQGibbon (talk) 00:45, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

How to avoid frustration
Ticklewickleukulele, I know it can be frustrating getting your edits reverted after you spend a long time working on them. It happens to the best of us when we get started. I've reviewed all of your edits, some are good, and I encourage you to get involved and keep editing. You can avoid future frustrations by reading WP:Guidelines. There really is a community of editors around here that you can become a part of. None of us were "assigned" to monitor you. We just all have vandalism tools which led us to your edits. If you improve your edits, we will stop reverting them. It seems to me that your biggest sticking point with other editors is your lack of citing sources. See: Identifying reliable sources. It's really easy to do when you find a good source. When in the edit box, just look for the "Cite" menu in the upper left had side of the edit window header. When you click it, a drop down menu saying "Templates" will appear below. Click on that and find the appropriate template. Then just fill in the form.

I know it may seem like this drab place needs a little more humor, trust me, I have a dark sense of humor; but those of us who spend hundreds sometimes thousands of hours trying to make this place usable as a great source of information for people, just find that something like You should not write meaningless lists is one more thing thing in the very very very long list of shit we have to monitor and correct. If you want to get on the good side of other editors (which helps if you are trying to avoid frustration) try to keep they cheeky humor refined to your own userspace. Something like User:Ticklewickleukulele/You should not write meaningless lists. I hope my comments help. Feel free to ask me any questions regarding how to improve your edits.-- D kriegls  ( talk to me! ) 02:28, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Bad day
It looks like you're having a bad day. All your contributions are reverted, even though they appear to be in good faith. Maybe you should look at each one and try to understand why. Compare what you were trying to accomplish with what the reverting editors might be thinking. Please ask here if you don't figure it out. Dicklyon (talk) 02:57, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

And now you're edit-warring about it instead of discussing. This is not good, and make you seem more like you are only to disrupt. If that's the case, we can ask for you to be blocked. Is that what you're looking for? Dicklyon (talk) 04:40, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Deleting an account
Hi, I saw your comment at User talk:Materialscientist, and I thought I would let you know. Unfortunately, due to copyright issues, you can't delete an account. Otherwise, you won't be given credit for the edits you made to the project! However, users are given the right to vanish. See WP:VANISH for more information. Michaelzeng7 (talk) 23:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

August 2012 sockpuppetry warning
Hello (User:Ticklewickleukulele) and welcome to Wikipedia. Your editing pattern indicates that you are using multiple accounts (Special:Contributions/99.113.14.200) to make or conceal unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this. Please edit from only one account; regularly switching between your IP address and your user name, especially on the same article and without disclosing it, can amount to sockpuppetry, which is a blockable offense.

Additionally, given your block, warning, edit and deleted article history, you seem to have had consistent problems with comprehending Wikipedia's core policies on verifiability, sourcing and what Wikipedia is not since you began editing. I urge you to please read the 3 above policies, as they go directly to the core of what Wikipedia is all about and will help you turn your Wikipedia career around before the admins get involved again. Looking at your talk page as is, you're cruising for an indefinite block as a persistent vandal. Bravo Foxtrot (talk) 01:17, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

re: A few questions
Hey, sorry for the delay in my response.

1) The difference between vandalism and original research is that with vandalism the person is trying to deface Wikipedia, like with swear words or erasing articles and the like. There is no intent to improve, just deface.

Original research is when someone adds what may be factual and well-written content but does so without supplying reliable sources. That person's intent may be entirely positive but without sources it is inappropriate for Wikipedia. You can read more about these here (vandalism) and here (original research).

2) I do not have the power to erase your records. In fact this is a very difficult thing to do and is only done so under extreme circumstances (like if personal information about an editor is published without their permission).  You can read more about that here.

3) I am not going to nominate you to be an administrator. This is nothing personal it's just that you do not appear to have enough experience and knowledge about how Wikipedia works.  Generally you need at least 3,0000 edits and a history of participating in administrative tasks.  You currently have just over 300 edits.  But even if I did nominate you, the nomination would be shot down very quickly.  You need to give it more time.  I have over 28,000 edits and probably would not successfully pass the nomination process.

4) There are various tools to help editors patrol for and revert vandalism. I use Twinkle.  It automatically appends the letters "TW" to the summary of every edit a Twinkle user makes when using Twinkle.  It is not a reference to your name.

If you have any more questions please do not hesitate to ask. SQGibbon (talk) 00:02, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

January 2013
Please do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. Geoff Who, me?  18:08, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

February 2013
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Capybara, you may be blocked from editing. --Mr Fink (talk) 20:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

You know, if the elephant wasn't a rodent, you could have just told me. If I said that the whale was a rodent then that is vandalism, but I remember being told that the elephant was the largest rodent. I would never do anything to vandalize Wikipedia. BTW it was a talk page. Ticklewickleukulele (talk) 01:06, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

July 2013
In a recent edit to the page Bacon, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. ''Please note that it has nothing to do with the number of English speakers in any given country, the article was started using British English, and per WP:RETAIN it shall continue to use British English. '' kelapstick(bainuu) 23:18, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

June 2014
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Ogg are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. SQGibbon (talk) 14:27, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Bold, Revert, Discuss
When you find your edit quickly reverted, as you did at Marriage, you should not just go and reinsert the same edit. Things work best here with the cycle of Bold, Revert, Discuss, or BRD. So if you want to see our article on marriage limited to the male-and-a-female version of it, you should now take it to Talk:Marriage and achieve consensus before reinserting it. --Nat Gertler (talk) 07:02, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 3 April
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * On the Diaphragm (acoustics) page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=654840836 your edit] caused a URL error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F654840836%7CDiaphragm (acoustics)%5D%5D Ask for help])

July 2015
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Satoru Iwata, you may be blocked from editing. SQGibbon (talk) 16:01, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Electronic visual display, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Text. 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) 14:19, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 6 December
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:41, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * On the Sexual attraction page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=694078676 your edit] caused a URL error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F694078676%7CSexual attraction%5D%5D Ask for help])

December 2015
Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Synthesizer. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. SQGibbon (talk) 03:25, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

lightbulb listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Lightbulb. Since you had some involvement with the lightbulb redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Thryduulf (talk) 19:53, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Friending and following, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Candid. 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) 10:22, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wreath (attire), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Coachella. 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) 10:12, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Transitioning (transgender), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Social Security. 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) 10:42, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Libra/zebra
Re this edit: Don't "Libra" and "zebra" rhyme with "cerebra"? Khemehekis (talk) 14:34, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 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 2022 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) 00:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 31
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited IBM Personal Computer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Commodore. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:18, 31 August 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) 00:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Reappropriation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brat.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

January 2024
Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Laptop, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. The category being added must already exist, and must be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. I'm not sure I see how a laptop would specifically be an "improvised" musical instrument, and the current article text doesn't appear to mention anything like this. Belbury (talk) 17:16, 15 January 2024 (UTC)