User talk:Lertaheiko

Welcome!

Hi Lertaheiko! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 12:44, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024

Hello, I'm Daisytheduck. I noticed that you recently removed content from Robert A. Good 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. Daisytheduck ^{quack quack} 01:14, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Bagumba. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Johnny Buss, 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. —Bagumba (talk) 18:22, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Johnny Buss, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Specifically, you can refer to MOS:OVERLINK about unneeded links and MOS:NOPIPE about piping redirects. —Bagumba (talk) 18:24, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Johnny Buss, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. That contradicts that his page says he was still married to another woman. Per WP:CIRCULAR: "Do not use articles from Wikipedia ... Confirm that these sources support the content, then use them directly. Finally, WP:TMZ is not reliable enough. —Bagumba (talk) 00:40, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bagumba I've had to revert a lot of this editor's changes because they keep marking major changes as minor as well as removing a lot of "unused" parameters from infoboxes. Mason (talk) 03:35, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Both the mairrage info for Johnny and Christy contradicted each other. They should now be all consistent with each other. Thank you. Lertaheiko (talk) 16:53, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lertaheiko! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Gorgias that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a 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. Thank you. Mason (talk) 03:25, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Smasongarrison. I noticed that you recently removed content from Gregory Nagy 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. Please don't remove unused parameters like you did here. It's disruptive and makes it more difficult for people to add that information. Mason (talk) 03:27, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was helpful since it makes the editing screen less cumbersome/bloated. I'll only remove them when it doesen't make sence within the context of the article, and ones that are deprecaded. Lertaheiko (talk) 17:17, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think its a good idea for you to remove ones that don't make sense within the article context, given that you're still new. I think you should spend your time learning the ropes of wikipedia. For example, you've been marking a lot of things as minor that aren't. And you seem to not understand that interarticle consistency is not a priority compared to sourcing. Mason (talk) 20:37, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Smasongarrison. I noticed that you recently removed content from Isabelle Cogitore 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. Please stop removing values from infoboxes Mason (talk) 05:07, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There weren't any unused parameters in the article. Lertaheiko (talk) 13:58, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You did not explain why you removed content. Further, you're at risk of an edit war by reverting reverts. Please slow down and take the advice given to you on your talk page. Mason (talk) 14:43, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please use edit summaries

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! -- Pemilligan (talk) 17:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was around 15% before, but is now at 34%. Lertaheiko (talk) 14:46, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It should be much much higher. Mason (talk) 05:04, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Go into your Preferences. There is an option you can opt for that will remind you when you edit and don't leave an edit summary. That way, you don't have to remember because the system won't accept your edit unless you provide an edit summary. If you look at experienced editors, they always include an edit summary to help other editors understand why they did what they did. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:28, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Warnings

Hello, Lertaheiko,

For an editor who has only been active for a month, you have a LOT of warning messages on your User talk page. This is more than some editors receive over the course of an entire year. They mean that experienced editors have run into some of your edits which they have found problematic. I can see where all of these notices could seem overwhelming but if you want to be an editor for the long-term, it would be to your benefit to read over the problems they point out so that you can correct your editing mistakes.

If you have any questions about editing on Wikipedia, please feel free to bring them to the Teahouse where you can receive advice, support and a second opinion. Good luck with your editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:22, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! Lertaheiko, 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! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:23, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Jim Buss. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Please don't link successive geographical units per MOS:GEOLINK (e.g. don't link California separately in Los Angeles, California). —Bagumba (talk) 15:05, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Dippy has an edit summary that appears to be inadequate, inaccurate, or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Stop claiming the reverts are unexplained. They're not, and you claiming otherwise is inaccurate. I have explained these issues on your talk page. Mason (talk) 21:43, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Isabella Binney Cogswell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Halifax.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2024

Hello, I'm Gial Ackbar. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Kerbal Space Program 2, 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. Gial Ackbar (talk) 11:04, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Kerbal Space Program 2, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. In this context, original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources don't explicitly say. Thank you. Apenguinlover<talk>() 23:05, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:55, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]