User talk:Angel94117

This is Angel94117's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Welcome!

Hello, Angel94117!

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, 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (September 16)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Timtrent were:

I'm not totally sure what this is, but I know it is not a wikipedia article. It is more suited to a news magazine piece seeking to sate a segment of an educational system.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

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 User:Angel94117/sandbox 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.

🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Angel94117! 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! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Private school scandals in the United States (September 17)

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

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

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:Private school scandals in the United States 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.

Hey man im josh (talk) 12:18, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Private school scandals in the United States (September 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by SafariScribe were:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

The comment the reviewer left was:

It still reads like an WP:ESSAY. Again, there is a large gap, perhaps, WP:UNDUEWEIGHT. How would you list few schools and leave others and still name the draft, "...in the United States." Since you listed few schools, it would be good if you open a WP:MERGE discussion to start or update an existing 'controversy' section.

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:Private school scandals in the United States 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.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 04:26, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024

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. MrOllie (talk) 18:56, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not agree that was an edit war. I did not make more than three reverts, and each time I had a good reason. Also, I was the one who created material and did due diligence on the sources. This was continually misunderstood by one other editor who has a habit of removing my material and for different reasons, one of which you agreed was not legit. Angel94117 (talk) 21:58, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To quote from above: you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule. Having a 'good reason' does not mean you can edit war. Everyone thinks they have a good reason. MrOllie (talk) 22:05, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agreed with your third opinion. That is not warring. I read the warring section, and did not do anything noted. Angel94117 (talk) 23:19, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You plainly did by reverting 4 times. I'm not trying to attack you or lay blame - it is crucial that you understand what edit warring is if you are going to continue on Wikipedia without being blocked. If you don't believe what I am telling you for whatever reason, WP:TEAHOUSE is a good place to seek clarification from uninvolved editors. MrOllie (talk) 23:27, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just checked and it was not within 24 hours. Also the last revert was because the other editor cited bad information for their revert; almost none of the points were correct. This editor has followed me and reverted me from page to page and changed the reasons repeatedly. You also stated that the reservation on notability was not accurate. I did not revert when you did the third opinion, which is a possible resolution step under warring. I just don't like being told I am doing things that I am not, and this has become a pattern with the few editors that I have been in communication with on Wikipedia. Yes, I see that you can be blocked even without violating the three-revert rule, but that must be for bad behavior. Thanks for suggesting the Tree House, I have worked with them before. Angel94117 (talk) 00:16, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:32 on 9/25 was the first revert

18:39 on 9/27 was the fourth revert Angel94117 (talk) 00:25, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm telling you how things are done around here in my experience, you can listen - or not. I'd prefer that you listen and stick around to be a help to the encyclopedia rather than getting blocked. But I won't bother you any further here, this will be my last post in this thread. MrOllie (talk) 00:38, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]