User talk:CameUpStarvin'

Welcome!

Hello, CameUpStarvin', and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Christchurch mosque shootings. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Roger 8 Roger (talk) 10:24, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

Your edit to Gary Webb 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. Nick Levine (talk) 08:54, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please distinguish the heavily redacted version of Gary Webb's quote from the full quote in terms of breaching copyright. CameUpStarvin' (talk) 11:57, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Blaze Wolf. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Gary Webb, 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. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 12:53, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Gary Webb, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 23:23, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's the same source as the passage above what I wrote. There is no issue here. CameUpStarvin' (talk) 08:52, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Gary Webb. Learn from your mistake or you will probably get sanctioned. YOU NEED A SOURCE Roxy the dog 17:53, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This passage you are trying to add to the Gary Webb article isn't just a issue as far as sourcing goes. In my opinion, it is also a POV issue. You state: "Within this essay Webb detailed an active "collusion between the press and the powerful" to report freely on inconsequential matters.....". That's a problem. You are going with Webb's POV on the matter rather than attributing it to him. It should state something like In this essay, Webb detailed his belief that [so on and so forth]..."Rja13ww33 (talk) 18:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct to point out that it's your opinion, however the fact that quotation marks surround Gary Webb's words clearly indicate it's from him, thus settling this in my favour. Furthermore the source is the same as the above passage which is stated from the outset. CameUpStarvin' (talk) 18:48, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I tweaked it a bit to make it clear.Rja13ww33 (talk) 01:54, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe you did. The changes were authored by myself. CameUpStarvin' (talk) 12:59, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My edit is the last one done on the article.Rja13ww33 (talk) 02:31, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

By the way-just a FYI for future reference-generally one source per paragraph is considered minimum. Even if you state in the text where something is coming from.....citing a reference is needed. (Even if you have to use the same one multiple times in a row for multiple paragraphs.)Rja13ww33 (talk) 02:03, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Winston Churchill. David Biddulph (talk) 08:58, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please can you substantiate your claims of "unsourced or poorly sourced material". I have no issue providing sources for my comments however the opening paragraphs of the Winston Churchill make no use of references. I will therefore reinstate my contribution. CameUpStarvin' (talk) 09:01, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to my Talk:Churchill contribution regarding Churchill's legacy. You've not responded to my challenge of your assertion that what I wrote was 'unsourced or poorly sourced material' and have simply engaged in an edit war. Please critique my contribution in an appropriate way. CameUpStarvin' (talk) 10:05, 23 November 2022 (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. PhilKnight (talk) 09:18, 23 November 2022 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:CameUpStarvin' reported by User:GreenCows (Result: ). GreenCows (talk) 19:50, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've contributed to it. CameUpStarvin' (talk) 19:53, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Winston Churchill. 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 read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 19:56, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Lucy Letby Miscarriage of Justice Claims

Hello, CameUpStarvin'. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Lucy Letby Miscarriage of Justice Claims, 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) 22:05, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Lucy Letby Miscarriage of Justice Claims

Hello, CameUpStarvin'. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Lucy Letby Miscarriage of Justice Claims".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, 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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]