User talk:WikiGuruWanaB

Welcome!
Hello, WikiGuruWanaB, and welcome to Wikipedia!&#32;Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Vision Éternel, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article.&#32;Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms our use and policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
 * The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:44, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018
Your recent editing history at Vision Éternel shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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. See BRD for 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.  Acroterion   (talk)   15:01, 22 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Telling people not to revert your preferred version isn't appropriate, nor is repeatedly reverting to your preferred version.  Acroterion   (talk)   15:03, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * WikiGuruWanaB, please review Manual of Style/Accessibility/Alternative text for images. You are confusing captions with alt text. Captions can be used to provide additional information that supplements the image, such as the date of the photograph. Alt text is provided to replace the image for those who cannot see it (visually impaired, low bandwidth readers with images turned off, etc.), and should only describe what can be seen from the image: the hat, the moustache, the snow, etc. You might name a famous person in alt text, but not someone whom a general reader is unlikely to be familiar with. --RexxS (talk) 17:20, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * WikiGuruWanaB, please review Manual of Style/Accessibility/Alternative text for images. You are confusing captions with alt text. Captions can be used to provide additional information that supplements the image, such as the date of the photograph. Alt text is provided to replace the image for those who cannot see it (visually impaired, low bandwidth readers with images turned off, etc.), and should only describe what can be seen from the image: the hat, the moustache, the snow, etc. You might name a famous person in alt text, but not someone whom a general reader is unlikely to be familiar with. --RexxS (talk) 17:20, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Feedback Through A Magnifying Glass Volume I for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Feedback Through A Magnifying Glass Volume I is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Feedback Through A Magnifying Glass Volume I until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Richard3120 (talk) 15:01, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Richard Thurston
It seems like your approach is to add everything back on and put it on the removing editor to cherry pick out contents that are acceptable, rather than that inserting editor re-evaluate what they've added and only add acceptable contents. You objected to my broad reversion, yet you did so by broadly restoring contents. There are too many problems with the series of edits. For example, for WP:BLP, everything introduced should be sourced. You re-introduced the infobox wholly, but where is the reliable source supporting the subject's date of birth? You restored contents that are considered unreliable per WP:QS, such as discogs, in addition to removing valid maintenance templates. Graywalls (talk) 04:29, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

August 2021
Thank you for trying to keep Wikipedia free of vandalism. However, one or more edits you labeled as vandalism, such as the edit at Netflix, are not considered vandalism under Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia has a stricter definition of the word "vandalism" than common usage, and mislabeling edits as vandalism can discourage editors. Please see what is not vandalism for more information on what is and is not considered vandalism. Thank you. - Aoidh (talk) 03:35, 4 August 2021 (UTC)