User talk:Baronet13
Your recent editing history at Will Self 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 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.
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Category:People with dependent personality disorder requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 June 20#Category:People with dependent personality disorder. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Bbb23 (talk) 17:42, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi there. A note that you have not created a discussion page for the AFD attempt at the above article. Tony Fox (arf!) 22:40, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
August 2022
[edit]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Brooke Skylar Richardson. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. NebY (talk) 11:01, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- There is only one editor who disagrees with the edits I made, and that is only because this person monitors my account and indiscriminately reverts every edit I make. This person has previously been blocked for edit warring and has been involved in numerous disputes over harassment. The edits I made are not clearly not controversial and I would welcome any discussion about my edits. Baronet13 (talk) 06:49, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- It seems you misunderstand how many editors have reverted your edits and how we come to notice them. Those comments are in breach of our policy on personal attacks WP:NPA.
- Please read the above warning again. It tells you what you are doing wrong and what you should do. After re-reading it and considering that every part of it applies to you (yes, including the mention of controversial changes), you could also read our guidance on proceeding after an edit's reverted WP:BRD, our policy on material about living people WP:BLP and the fundamental policy WP:V. NebY (talk) 14:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Only one editor has reverted the edits to these particular pages. My comments about this editor are not a personal attacks, just the truth. Others have had similar experiences. Baronet13 (talk) 00:00, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Gert Postel, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. The category being added must already exist, and must be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. Thank you. NebY (talk) 11:11, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi Baronet13! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Gert Postel that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. NebY (talk) 11:12, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Unbh. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Susan Karolewski, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. You cannot add most of these categories without really good sourcing. If these things could be reliably sourced then there would likely be enough for full page on these individuals anyway.
Your addition of categories to these redirects has also been referred by multiple editors, you need to discuss on talk. Unbh (talk) 03:43, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- All categories (both the ones I added and the ones that were already there) are supported by information in the article, all of which seem to me are supported by reliable sources. Having objections to one or a few categories does not justify deletion of all categories, most of which are objectively accurate and aren't really open to debate. If you object to any particular category or categories, discuss it on the talk page. Baronet13 (talk) 22:07, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Category:People with dependent personality disorder requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 June 20#Category:People with dependent personality disorder. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Bbb23 (talk) 19:26, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
Blocked as a sockpuppet
[edit]
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.