User talk:Rachesnut

March 2012
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Santa Muerte, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.
 * Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place " " on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Santa Muerte was changed by Rachesnut (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.899512 on 2012-03-07T13:21:18+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 13:21, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Santa Muerte
I reverted your changes to Santa Muerte because they were significant content changes without new citations to back them up. The original information is cited and if you make changes you need to provide citations to show the difference (and said citations should indicate that they are more reliable). This article is controversial by nature so citations are even MORE important than for the typical Wikipedia article. If you need help with citations and improving the content of this article, Im more than happy to help. Please dont start an edit war.Thelmadatter (talk) 15:07, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * You may be an expert on Santa Muerte but not on editing Wikipedia. You added no new citations to the article when you made the changes. Author status does not matter when it comes to Wikipedia articles because the only way for the many people who read Wikipedia to have any idea how credible the information is is through the citations. By the way, you really shouldnt cite your own work either (conflict of interest). Again, Im happy to help you improve the article showing you what needs to be done in order to make the changes stick, but you need to work WITH the Wikipedia community. If you like, you can send me an ecopy of the book or pages of the book that apply and I can make the changes.Thelmadatter (talk) 19:17, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I see that you have added the citations to your own work which Ive verified does exist, but its still considered a conflict of interest see WP:COI. I disagree with you on the prominent only since the last ten years, however. I would still like to see the pages to verify the information you added.Thelmadatter (talk) 19:39, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem. I have made note of our dispute on the article talk page and at the administrators' noticeboard.Thelmadatter (talk) 20:22, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * That last edit was blatant self promotion.Thelmadatter (talk) 00:22, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

The changes you made on 30 Dec were not small but significant with no citations to back it up. First of all, there is no "Santa Muerte" rosary. Ive been at that event in Tepito (I live in Mexico City) and it is the normal rosary. Marijuana is not used instead.. it appears along with more traditional incense.Thelmadatter (talk) 03:51, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Of course it's the Santa Muerte rosary and not the standard Catholic one dedicated to the Virgin. I have a printed copy of it given to me by Dona Queta, owner of the famous Tepito shrine. I'm happy to oblige you with said citation. The marijuana contribution is not mine! I merely improved the prose. You really should be more careful and detailed in your reading.purepecha (talk) 04:17, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:34, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 20:39, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

December 2012
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule&#32;at Santa Muerte. 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 would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 21:21, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Based on your e-mail request, I would not unblock you. However, you can follow the instructions above to make an unblock request here that another admin will review. Just so you know, your block will expire in a few hours.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:31, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * This is your only warning. If you persist in returning to the Santa Muerte article and continuing the war you were battling before your block, you risk being blocked again, this time for a longer period.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:23, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Interviews
Can you get a published source about the New Orleans information? Wikipedia does not allow for personal interviews to be used as information because it is not verifiable. Verifiability and interviews are considered to be original research No_original_research. I did not revert the addition of information but rather will add a citation needed tag. Thelmadatter (talk) 15:34, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I see the change, but unfortunately Facebook is not considered to be a reliable source. Anything published about him? I often get local newspaper articles and other hard-to-get sources that Wikipedi will accept by contacting the person. Most people keep scrapbooks of stuff that has been written about them.Thelmadatter (talk) 16:18, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

I'll ask him, but is unlikely since the shrine is less than a year old.