User talk:Belflower1997
 | An editor has expressed a concern that this account may be a sockpuppet of 1962monroe (talk · contribs · logs). Please refer to I Dream of Jeannie, Gilligan's Island for evidence. Account information: block log – contribs – logs – abuse log – CentralAuth |
|
Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!
[edit]
|
Hello! Belflower1997,
you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! heather walls (talk) 07:07, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
|
Creating Wikipedia articles without references
[edit]Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. However, you have created the following seven articles without any references:
- Kate Bradley
- Joe Carson (character)
- Billie Jo Bradley
- Bobbie Jo Bradley
- Betty Jo Bradley
- Steve Elliott (character)
- Dr. Janet Craig
Verifiability is one of the most important aspects of Wikipedia and is achieved by using reliable sources as references. Please consult the following Wikipedia articles before creating any more unreferenced content:
Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 15:06, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
May 2012
[edit]
Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Empty Nest, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Shearonink (talk) 23:11, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
June 2012
[edit] Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Kim Novak, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Shearonink (talk) 01:29, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to Marilyn Monroe does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Gyrofrog (talk) 17:37, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Marilyn Monroe, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. Gyrofrog (talk) 17:37, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Your enthusiasm for the various Hollywood-subject articles that you've edited on Wikipedia is admirable, but please try to remember...
- Edit summaries are a good thing.
- Preview buttons are a good thing.
- Referencing articles when you create them is a good thing.
Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 02:23, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello
[edit]
|
The Editor's Barnstar | |
| Brilliant work on Jayne Mansfield, couldn't wait till the end to post this. Aditya(talk • contribs) 13:07, 13 June 2012 (UTC) |
You are the most awesome copyeditor to take an interest in Jayne Mansfield. If you have time, I request you to keep collaborating. The idea is to make it a featured soon. I may have a difference in opinion at times and, since the article is still expanding a bit, not everything will be fixable right away. But, we can discuss the matters on the talk page to take the best course. Aditya(talk • contribs) 13:07, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
- I have already posted two discussions on the talk page of the article. Aditya(talk • contribs) 13:41, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Jayne Mansfield shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Although you have proven yourself as an awesome editor, you seem to be missing a few behavioral points here:
- Discuss: Discussions happen at article talk pages, user talk pages, and sometime community talk pages. Your edits and other editor's responses happen at discussion pages. If you ignore the discussion, may be you will ignored too, and even penalized at times.
- Avoid edit warring: This means that you don't make the same edit overriding other editors without a consensus, unless there is clear vandalism involved. Edit war is seen as serious bad behavior, and is highly punishable if it keeps going on.
- Avoid copyright violations: Wikipedia is a free content encyclopedia, which means any of its content may be used for educational or commercial purpose or even as derivatives. We can't give away other people's work free, and that is why we are very sensitive about copyright violations.
Please, respect Wikipedia norms while making your fine contribution to Wikipedia. Aditya(talk • contribs) 05:15, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Sockpuppetry case
[edit]
|
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/1962monroe for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 07:04, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
The article Steve Elliott (character) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:19, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Nomination of Steve Elliott (character) for deletion
[edit]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Elliott (character) 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.
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:49, 22 January 2021 (UTC)