User talk:Josephine121901
May 2020
[edit]
Hello, I'm EditQwerty. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Stay safe, EditQwerty (talk) 16:12, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
I’m not sure what you mean. How was it not constructive? The info provided in sourced (and proven by works on network television) this actor is mentioned on the pages that were linked in Wikipedia for each of the shows, and is verified by IMDb. I’m not sure why you keep redirecting this actresses page to a show she did years ago when she has been a series regular on shows since. Please advise as I would like to know why. I appreciate your time Josephine121901 (talk) 16:51, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
Welcome
[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Teahouse.
Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...
Finding your way around:
|
Need help?
|
|
How you can help:
|
|
Additional tips...
|
Someone keeps changing a page to redirect and says this page doesn’t count as as WP:NACTOR but this person is a series regular on several notable tv shows, how do I fix this? Josephine121901 (talk) 16:39, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
Important notice 1
[edit]
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:01, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
All of the information sited is through IMDb, a reputable site with verified information as to actor’s works completed. Josephine121901 (talk) 17:03, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
- No; see below. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:04, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
Important notice 2
[edit]- Please have a look at Wikipedia's biographies of living people policy.
- Please do not use user-generated content like wikis or the publicly editable IMDb as references in Wikipedia articles, especially not when writing about living people.
- Please have a look at our list of known unreliable sources to see if there's an entry about a source you would like to use.
If you continue to use IMDb or Fandom/Wikia as source for statements about living people, you will be blocked from editing without further warning. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:04, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
IMDb is publicly editable as you say but edits are VERIFIED by IMDb before they are added. This is beyond frustrating. Are press releases valid? This actor works for our agency and all the works cited are completely verified. Josephine121901 (talk) 17:06, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
May 2020
[edit]
Your account has been blocked indefinitely for advertising or promotion and violating the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use. This is because you have been making promotional edits to topics in which you have an undisclosed financial stake, yet you have failed to adhere to the mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a form of conflict of interest (COI) editing which involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is strictly prohibited. Using this site for advertising or promotion is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, please read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text {{unblock|reason=your reason here ~~~~}} at the end of your user talk page. For that request to be considered, you must:
- Confirm that you have read and understand the Terms of Use and paid editing disclosure requirements.
- State clearly how you are being compensated for your edits, and describe any affiliation or conflict of interest you might have with the subjects you have written about.
- Describe how you intend to edit such topics in the future. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:06, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Rachael Ancheril 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Bensci54 (talk) 17:07, 7 May 2020 (UTC)