User talk:117PXL

Welcome!

Hello, 117PXL!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:40, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits

Like almost all new editors, you have misunderstood Wikipedia:Minor edit. You can read the long version but in summary, a "minor edit" is one that has no material effect – for example a spelling or grammar correction. Size does not matter: to change "now" to "not" (or v à v) is only a one letter change but is certainly not minor. So it is a tag to be used rarely. No harm done, so long as you remember to use leave a WP:EDITNOTE. (I'm not shouting, shortcuts are written like that .) 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:49, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I'll be more accurate. 117PXL (talk) 20:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

Hello, I'm Drmies. An edit that you recently made seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 20:51, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello 117PXL! Your additions to Publishing have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 15:07, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry if I misunderstood the rules. This information had been repeated on various news sources so I thought the summary would be quotable. I did check the Wikipedia copyright page and it said you could repeat facts. 117PXL (talk) 19:10, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually what you did was copy a couple of copyright press releases into Wikipedia, pretty much word for word. That's not allowed. — Diannaa (talk) 20:55, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Official Cambridge Guide to IELTS (February 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Akevsharma was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Official Cambridge Guide to IELTS and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Akevsharma (talk) 10:53, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 117PXL! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Akevsharma (talk) 10:53, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023

Your addition to United Kingdom has been removed or altered, as it appears to closely paraphrase a copyrighted source. Limited close paraphrasing or quotation is appropriate within reason, so long as the material is clearly attributed in the text. However, longer paraphrases which are not attributed to their source may constitute copyright violation or plagiarism, and are not acceptable on Wikipedia. Such content cannot be hosted here for legal reasons; please do not post it on any page, even if you plan to fix it later. You may use external websites or printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If you own the copyright to the text, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the copyright but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Belbury (talk) 12:51, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Society for Effecting the Abolition of the Slave Trade has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Belbury (talk) 10:39, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Official Cambridge Guide to IELTS

Hello, 117PXL. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Official Cambridge Guide to IELTS, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 11:03, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Official Cambridge Guide to IELTS

Hello, 117PXL. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Official Cambridge Guide to IELTS".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:28, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023

Your edit to Artificial intelligence has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. This is your final warning. Further violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy will result in you being blocked from editing. — Diannaa (talk) 22:13, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I have rewrote and paraphrased as best I can. 117PXL (talk) 14:20, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

Hello, I'm Cordless Larry. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, United Kingdom, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:58, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the UK page needs up to date data for businesses and target markets etc. England, Wales & N Ireland have good census data 2021. Scotland have 2022 figures but have not published the data fully. Probably could get estimates from the other countries for 2022. The 2011 figures make the whole page look out of date. Any suggestions? 117PXL (talk) 22:01, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What businesses need isn't our concern; we're guided by verifiability. Until the Scottish census ethnicity results are released, there's not much we can do. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:05, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. When the Scottish census results are released in full, should we do it as 2021/2022 and explain in a note? I believe we need to find a solution sooner or later. Thanks. 117PXL (talk) 09:17, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. We'll have to see whether any official statistics combining the figures for the whole UK are produced, as they have been in the past. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:21, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024

Your recent editing history at United Kingdom 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—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—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. DeCausa (talk) 12:16, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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 review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:54, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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—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—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:41, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. DeCausa (talk) 00:44, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring, as you did at United Kingdom. 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 review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Aoidh (talk) 01:50, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing

Please don't insert new material in front of a reference, when that material isn't supported by the existing reference, as you did here. This is explained at WP:SOURCEHIJACKING if you don't understand why this is a problem. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:33, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, it just means using a lot of citations that affect Google ranks. 117PXL (talk) 17:21, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:VERIFY is what matters, not Google rankings. But the key point is that inserting material ahead of an existing reference misleadingly makes it look like the material is supported by that reference, and separates the reference from the material that it actually supports. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:23, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit on UK

Can you improve your recent edit? I liked what you did with the gallery of images to showcase the UK's gegraohy, but it got reverted. Can you try to do something like that but different? 2A0A:EF40:E55:5F01:A579:1157:ACB8:D3AB (talk) 20:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest with you, I think it's ridiculous that your edit got reverted. 2A0A:EF40:E55:5F01:A579:1157:ACB8:D3AB (talk) 20:14, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look again sometime, it's very hard to make it fair without someone reacting 117PXL (talk) 21:28, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I get you. You did a lovely job. Love all the images you used. Maybe just trimming it down? Worth a try. But you know what some here are like. 2A0A:EF40:E55:5F01:A579:1157:ACB8:D3AB (talk) 21:30, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits on the United Kingdom

Your recent revert here has been reverted on the basis that you have removed sourced information, from a reliable source. You previously reverted this edit on the basis that "all UK countries should look equal", and I have noted that you have used this excuse a few times in your edit reverts. Would you care to explain what it is you exactly mean by this? Equal should not be brought into question. If UK Parliament law (such as the Scotland Act 2016) states that both the Scottish Parliament and Government are "permanent parts of the UK constitutional arrangements" and cannot be abolished without consent in a legal referendum, then that it what stands in the eyes of the law, and therefore, on Wikipedia. Goodreg3 (talk) 21:01, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was reverted because UK laws can be repealed or amended, therefore the government if they were inclined and it was voted for, and the House of Lords agreed, they could amend the law, then abolish the Scottish Parliament, as they could to the Senedd in Wales or the Northern Ireland Assembly. Therefore it is less effective than the international law between the UK and Ireland regarding power sharing in the Northern Ireland Assembly. The law is a powerful protection, but it could be abolished so the text is not correct. I was trying to word it respectfully. 117PXL (talk) 21:18, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The source provided by the UK Parliament on the Scotland Act (2016) does not state that the act can be amended, therefore, we cannot assume that the UK Parliament would or would not amend the act, regardless of whether, in theory, this may or may not happen. Goodreg3 (talk) 21:31, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence "Under the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty, the UK Parliament could, in theory, therefore, abolish..." has a citation though it is dated 2004 regarding Scotland, I can add an additional one which is current that states "The implication of parliamentary sovereignty is that Westminster Parliament is legally entitled to pass, amend or repeal any law that it wishes." or "Parliamentary sovereignty is a principle of the UK constitution. It makes Parliament the supreme legal authority in the UK, which can create or end any law." Which then contradicts the following sentence. But it is neater to revert the amended text. 117PXL (talk) 06:10, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not required, as the article already states it very clearly that the UK Parliament is sovereign.

It is a centralised, unitary state wherein the Parliament of the United Kingdom is sovereign

Goodreg3 (talk) 18:37, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also the Wales Act 2017 states that the Welsh government is a permanent part of the UK's constitutional arrangements in a similar way to Scotland. 117PXL (talk) 06:54, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A request

Hey, I see you have made many economic related edits to the United Kingdom page. Do you think you could work on the Economy of England page? Currently, some of it needs work and only limited users can edit it. If you compare it, let's say the Economy of Scotland, you can see how much expanding it needs.

Thanks for your awesome UK edits! 2A0A:EF40:EDE:B201:B1C5:8BA4:D9E:1D30 (talk) 22:09, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK sure, I'll look into it. 117PXL (talk) 11:50, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Britain

Hello there

I have made an edit to this page to bring the two article into alignment. As I have removed the phrase: "and was a crucial turning point in the conflict" you might like to comment.

Cheers Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 10:16, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]