User talk:LEGENDARY VIP

This is LEGENDARY VIP'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.

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (December 27)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Curbon7 was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Patent nonsense.

Curbon7 (talk) 05:38, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:LEGENDARY VIP/sandbox

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 User:LEGENDARY VIP/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. bonadea contributions talk 13:00, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (December 28)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Curbon7 was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

Curbon7 (talk) 06:15, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LEGENDARY VIP! 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! Curbon7 (talk) 06:15, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Hello, I'm Iwaqarhashmi. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Fighter aircraft, 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. Waqar (talk) 07:51, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Espionage. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Meters (talk) 09:15, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Prehistoric warfare, you may be blocked from editing. Don't change between American and British spelling, don't change direct quotes, and don't introduce sneaky vandalism. Meters (talk) 09:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. Bump to final after looking at other edits. Meters (talk) 09:31, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

LEGENDARY VIP, are you by any chance using a spell/grammar checker? The many language errors in your edits look like the kind of thing that happens when you run a text through an automated grammar checker and apply all the changes the software suggests. Please don't do that! Grammar checkers suggest a lot of changes that introduce new errors, and you should only make language changes that you have verified yourself. Thanks, --bonadea contributions talk 11:10, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Meters Thanks for doing those reverts. After I saw a note at AFCHelp that this submission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:LEGENDARY_VIP/sandbox was rejected (it's worth checking out), I looked at the editor's most recent edits.

At https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Espionage&diff=prev&oldid=1130250685 I saw that refs in the article source were getting replaced by numbers in brackets, like [1]. Bonadea, are you saying that maybe the editor was running the article through spellcheck, which of course was working from the displayed article that had the ref numbers in brackets? I wondered how he or she was losing the references. I am fairly new, so I wasn't sure whether a revert was the right thing to do.

I haven't checked the editor's earlier edits, but there are a few each day since the 25th (there, they introduced errors and then fixed them). Do check out the rejected draft! David10244 (talk) 09:17, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bonadea I originally got two replies (from Meters and Bonadea) conflated, messed up a bit. Sorry about that. David10244 (talk) 09:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@David10244: I think you are right about the references – I never thought of that! The signs I saw of probable spell/grammar checker use without verifying that the changes were valid were things like "he has no inside knowledge of the project, save what his sister told him" (correct) changed to "he has no inside knowledge of the project, and saves what his sister told him" (incorrect); "Jean is able to obtain a three-year extension" (correct) changed to "Jean can obtain a three-year extension" (also correct but less idiomatic), and a correct "which" into an incorrect "that", all from this edit; in the edit you linked to, the change of "In order to" to just "To" is a clear sign (Grammarly, for instance, has a weird prejudice against the phrasing "in order to"), as is the incorrect change of "Milorg to "Milord", since a spellchecker won't have the former in its word list, and will flag it as a spelling error. --bonadea contributions talk 11:44, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible I was incorrect when I called some of this sneaky vandalism. My apologies to LEGENDARY VIP if that's the case, but I can't see that all of these edits could be the result of running a spell checker, or even a grammar checker, on displayed content. Some of the changes do appear to be explained that way, but many of the changes cannot be. Here [1], changing [[sport]]s to [[Sport|sports]], is not something that a spell checker or grammar checker could do, and would have no effect on the displayed text (and no, I would not call that vandalism). And consider the first two edits of a series [2] and [3]. First one link is removed and "Life" in the pipe on the second link is changed to "Live", and then the second edit restores the removed link, but again with an incorrect pipe. No spelling or grammar checker would result in that sequence of edits, particularly when the list contains multiple instances of similar strings (such as [[Life (1984 film)|''Life'' (1984 film)]] that were not changed. I seem to remember also noticing two instances of changing "cite" to "site" inside references, but I'm not going to go looking for them.

So LEGENDARY VIP, what are you doing? Meters (talk) 19:49, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Meters I saw all of that "Life"/"Live" stuff, but I didn't know what to make of it. At first glance, I thought they were changing away from ths correct word and would leave it broken, but they eventually got back, after a lot of edits. Sheesh. I thought maybe there was manual editing plus search/replace, plus maybe spellchecking, because "blank then ||" was mass-changed to "||" with no blank in front. But that would be an edit in the source, not in the rendered article.

So, yes, @LEGENDARY VIP, what are you doing? Inquiring minds want to know. David10244 (talk) 08:52, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding User:LEGENDARY VIP/sandbox

Hello, LEGENDARY VIP. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that User:LEGENDARY VIP/sandbox, 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) 08:01, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of User:LEGENDARY VIP/sandbox

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. The page User:LEGENDARY VIP/sandbox has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:24, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:LEGENDARY VIP/sandbox

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 User:LEGENDARY VIP/sandbox, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
It appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. (See section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

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. Ruy (talk) 02:07, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

Hello, LEGENDARY VIP. Thank you for helping to build Wikipedia-- the world's largest free content encyclopedia. A page you created User:LEGENDARY VIP/sandbox has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seemed to be unambiguous advertising which only promoted a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to have been fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic.

This article needs to be rewritten from scratch from reliable, third party sources unconnected to the subject. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not an outlet for promotion, advocacy, or advertising.

Information on content and common pitfalls to avoid can be located here and here, however be aware that this is not an exhaustive list. Pages can sometimes avoid these pitfalls and still be seen as an ad copy or unambiguously promotional, particularly if the editor appears to be a paid editor or has some other conflict of interest. Please review these policies, including the FAQ page on organizations to determine if this applies to you.

Common mistakes or beliefs about promotional editing center on the assumption that promotional editing only applies to promotion for commercial gain. Some tags or G11 nominations are met with confusion by creators, particularly if they spend much time reading or creating corporate documents, mission/vision statements, or similar copy for their organization. The frequent exposure to promotional tone may make it difficult to notice non-neutral phrases or styles, as the editor has grown accustomed to seeing it as everyday writing or speech. This can be difficult, but not impossible, to unlearn.

Another common assumption is that the prohibition against promotional editing applies only to businesses or organizations. Anything can be promoted, including a person, a non-commercial organization, a point of view, etc. and CV/resumé's are by their nature promotional.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia-- subjects must meet notability guidelines with reliable sources that are unconnected with the subject and providing verifiable information. That generally means someone unconnected with the subject needs to have written a great deal about the subject. Please see this page on citing sources and Wikipedia:Common sourcing mistakes (notability). This page has templates you can use in citing your sources. Place the template {{Reflist}} at the bottom of the page, and references cited in the text will appear there. New article creation can be difficult, but the Article Wizard can help you. The new user tutorial can help you avoid future problems.You can ask for help at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk and on IRC chat Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure is a useful tutorial.

New article creation can be difficult and frustrating. Sometimes it is better to first gain experience by fixing and helping maintain existing articles. Wikipedia:Community portal/Opentask contains links to things that badly need doing, if you are so inclined. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:38, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:38, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Wasell. I noticed that you recently removed content from Kayako Saeki without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. —Wasell^(T) 06:07, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]