User talk:Joe12Hawk

October 2022
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In your recent edit to Erling Haaland, you added links to an article which did not add content or meaning, or repeated the same link several times throughout the article. Please see Wikipedia's guideline on links to avoid overlinking. Specifically MOS:DUPLINK TylerBurden (talk) 14:24, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:07, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to George Lucas. Thank you. - FlightTime  ( open channel ) 04:08, 20 October 2022 (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) 01:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

3RR
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Canterbury Tail talk 12:37, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I was editing the pages to reflect the truth and nothing but the truth. I used nothing but sources and factual information. The individual who I had an issue with edited my edits with stipulations I feel of implying it could or couldn't be true but provided no sources of their own except what seems like a bias against my edits and what has been said by those involved about the changes made to Star Wars and George himself. I only used sources directly from George Lucas himself and I have many more I could provide if needed. There's too many false narratives surrounding him and I'm only doing my best to provide the truth as it should be out there. Thank you! Joe12Hawk (talk) 19:28, 17 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I'm not pointing to anyone directly but there's about 3 users on these 'Star Wars' pages that do exactly what you describe whenever it's Lucas that says something and no one else. There was even one time when I added a quote that showed a different viewpoint on why Lucas might have acted the way he did, but it was deleted because it was too correcting of the other quote even though Wikipedia is about giving as many points of view as possible from reliable sources?! Mobfighter63 (talk) 01:58, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * apparently* Mobfighter63 (talk) 01:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

By those involved in** the changes made to Star Wars and George himself

My apologies for the typo in my message above this one. Joe12Hawk (talk) 19:32, 17 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I reverted your addition of youtube videos showing Lucas saying stuff. Wikipedia exists to summarize the literature about a topic, so let's allow WP:SECONDARY sources to comment on it, rather than picking and choosing things that Lucas has said. When you select various things he said, you are violating the hard policy of WP:No original research. Yes, he said it, but you are emphasizing his words in a manner not found in the literature. Binksternet (talk) 05:22, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm only adding more context to give a greater emphasis on other things that inspired his work as it's important to give a greater context than just the ones commonly talked about. I think it's important to emphasis more than just the common ones that everyone knows. I can provide a different reference of the same thing if needed. Joe12Hawk (talk) 05:30, 18 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I agree with you. As a fellow Lucas defender myself I strive to show people the truth about Lucas and his work as well. You and I have fought the same person in the past. UpdateNerd. While UpdateNerd has improved my citing abilities in the past, every time I used to put something about the Special Editions in a remotely positive light or just fixing a mistake that is clear if you just watch the movie. He will demand that you draw from the most popular sources you can and links to documentaries and videos don't cover it on Wikipedia. So, if you don't have something he considers good enough then he'll just delete all your work and will rarely give you a chance to put it back. I don't want to call him an enemy, however he's been amazingly difficult even when I did add my sources in the past. Mobfighter63 (talk) 01:51, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

January 2023
Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Cindy Williams, you may be blocked from editing. Sundayclose (talk) 17:54, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

That's a bit extreme but I added a new source. Joe12Hawk (talk) 21:25, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * My use of a level three warning is based on your previous warnings. Wikipedia has a system of escalating warnings. Thanks for adding the source. Sundayclose (talk) 21:29, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

I understand. You're welcome. Thank you for clarifying. I have always tried to give a valid source. So I'm not sure why I have these warnings. I've always done my best to give the truth in all of my edits. Joe12Hawk (talk) 21:34, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

March 2023
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia. Technopat (talk) 22:13, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Crystal Bernard, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jim Messina. 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) 06:01, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 23
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2023 Washington Huskies football team, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mark Helfrich.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

I Am Cuba
You added a footnote the the end of a paragraph, but the source does not the whole paragraph. Please don't do it. This creates a false impression for readers that information is sourced.- Altenmann >talk 17:43, 26 November 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) 00:44, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

January 2024
Hello, I'm Daniel Quinlan. Your recent edit to the page Arthur Smith (American football, born 1982) appears to have added premature information about a reported sports transaction, so it has been removed for now. The transaction is based on anonymous sources and/or awaiting an official announcement. If you believe the transaction has been completed, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. 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. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 06:12, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 1
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2024 Seattle Seahawks season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mike Macdonald.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:53, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

April 2024
Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Leon Washington. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. ''Specifically, Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization per MOS:CAPS. The consensus at Requests for comment/Capitalization of NFL draft article titles was to not capitalize the "d" in "NFL draft", so there is no need to pipe 2024 NFL Draft. Thanks.'' —Bagumba (talk) 08:27, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Edit warring on article: George Lucas
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Hostagecat (talk) 23:56, 13 June 2024 (UTC)