User talk:Personpersonperson12345

September 2018
Hello, I'm SNUGGUMS. Your recent edit appears to have added incorrect information, so it has been removed for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. 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. Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:25, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Kim Il-sung. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. RH cosm  (talk)  23:15, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Governor lists
Were you ever going to discuss your reasoning for adding that section, or just keep reverting without any reason given? --Golbez (talk) 04:32, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Living former members
Thanks for the work you're doing. Since you're going through them all (thanks again!), I suggest trying to keep them to a consistant format and language. Most of it was there before you edited the articles, but since you're going through them all, you have the chance to clean it up.
 * Use puntucation; call them "Members;" don't overuse capitals; don't be redundant; and much more…
 * For articles with no living members, I suggest looking at Illinois's 7th congressional district, which I just edited.
 * For articles with some living members, I suggest looking at Illinois's 2nd congressional district, which I just edited.

I welcome your edits and your feedback to my suggestions! —GoldRingChip 12:14, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Follow up
Did you see my earlier message? Please also note the changes I've just made to Illinois's 16th congressional district (here). Please do NOT calcuclate the ages manually, you must use birth date and age. Please Don't Overuse Capitals. —GoldRingChip 12:13, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Again
On your edit to Indiana's 2nd congressional district, you left off punctuation and spaces. —GoldRingChip 01:38, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

October 2018
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Maine's 2nd congressional district, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.  General Ization Talk  18:29, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Maine's 2nd congressional district, you may be blocked from editing.  General Ization Talk  18:41, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Maine's 2nd congressional district.  General Ization Talk  19:49, 28 October 2018 (UTC)


 * A source is needed for everything you add to Wikipedia, especially once your edit has been challenged. See WP:BURDEN. This is your last warning.   General Ization  <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 19:50, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
 * You may not rely on content "on another Wikipedia page" or pages to source content you add to an article. You have been warned. All of your unsourced edits to articles about state congressional districts have been reverted. Do not restore them without adding published, reliable sources for the content. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 19:56, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. 331dot (talk) 19:58, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

I am making no judgement about the validity of the content, but you edit warred to keep it there. This is not allowed, even if you are correct. I have also warned the other user about edit warring, though as they had no other warnings I did not block them. I have no objection to the block being ended if you agree to not edit war and discuss the matter on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 20:01, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

So you understand a little better what is going on here, the number of living (or dead) former representatives of a given Congressional district at any given moment is a) trivia, and b) easily ascertained by readers for themselves if this is something they care to know, as you indicated, by visiting the articles of those previous reps. However, when you add a section for that purpose to an article about the district, it must be sourced at that article. (Since in this specific case you are referring to four former members, you require four sources, unless you can find one source that supports the assertion concerning all four.) You may not rely on other articles to source content you add in the article where you add it, especially once your edit is challenged. In addition, when you preface your addition with "There are currently", you are immediately creating a requirement that the information be continuously updated or run the risk of the entire statement being false. Unless you are planning to be the one to continuously update it (and even if you are), we do not make such statements here. At most, you may use the as of template or similar language to indicate a point in time when the statements were true. Lastly, "The most recent to die being William Dodd Hathaway on June 24, 2013" is not a complete sentence and lacks a terminal period (hence is ungrammatical, as I repeatedly advised you). You have used this same format, neglected to provide sources, and made the same errors at numerous other articles concerning Congressional districts, and all have now been reverted for the same reasons. (Your assertion that "literally every other list like this has that section" is plainly false, because you added it to those that have it.) <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 20:18, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

With regard to the difficulty of finding sources to show that a group of people are still alive ("How would you even source something like this?"), you're right. That's why we don't set ourselves up to violate our own policies concerning sources by creating sections like this that cannot reasonably be sourced at the content. As I explained above, the reader can ascertain this for themselves by visiting multiple articles; aggregating the information here is unnecessary and trivial (because it provides no useful information about the Congressional district that is the subject of the article). <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 20:31, 28 October 2018 (UTC)