User talk:Mariewan

Welcome!

Hello, Mariewan, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! Yngvadottir (talk) 22:01, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Directories and indexes Department directory
Editing articles
Developing an article Simplified Manual of Style Copyright

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse The Help Desk, for more advanced questions Help pages Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Reverted edit

Hi. I reverted your recent edit in Junk food that consisted of a series of small edits[1]. Some of them created errors. In one instance, the wording of quoted material was changed. In another, the meaning was changed to something incorrect. In a couple of more minor word changes, common words were replaced with less common terms, which doesn't seem to improve readability. Hopefully you're taking more care in other articles you're working on. Cheers. Tsavage (talk) 12:56, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for correcting me. I will pay more close attention in my future edits. Good day. Mariewan (talk) 14:34, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. However, please do not use unreliable sources such as blogs, wikis, personal websites, and websites and publications with a poor reputation for checking the facts or with no editorial oversight. These sources may express views that are widely acknowledged as pushing a particular point-of-view, sometimes even extremist, being promotional in nature, or relying heavily on rumors and personal opinions. One of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. If you require further assistance, please look at Help:Menu/Editing Wikipedia, or ask at the Teahouse. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 04:12, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I'll get back to my previous edits and work on my errors. Thanks so much. Mariewan (talk) 05:38, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you're still using blogs as sources, as in this edit. A person's personal blog entry about how they are enjoying a nice bowl of Atol Shuco at my beach hotel isn't a reliable source, and it doesn't cover the gourd and hunting parts of the sentence that you're adding it as a footnote to.

Please stop using blogs as sources, and don't put a footnote after a sentence unless it verifies every statement made in that sentence. Belbury (talk) 18:02, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial websites that say things like FREE 14-day trial – no credit card required at the end of an anonymous blog entry are also discouraged per WP:VENDOR and WP:BLOGS. --Belbury (talk) 18:15, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your call-outs. I will do my best on my future edits. Mariewan (talk) 18:21, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have continued to make unexplained changes to article citations, including replacing reliable sources with unreliable ones. Why are you doing this? What are you trying to accomplish? MrOllie (talk) 00:07, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever your reasoning, please stop doing this. MrOllie (talk) 14:23, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm sorry that you do not see the explanations that I am including but, I have been doing explaining the changes I make. If you are referring to this specific article (Porridge article), I am gonna get back to it. Mariewan (talk) 14:36, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not referring to any specific article, you have been making these unexplained changes across a range of articles - if you are attempting to explain this somewhere, it has not appeared anywhere on Wikipedia. MrOllie (talk) 14:42, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

Content similarity detection

added links pointing to Verbatim and Criterion

Dog walking

added a link pointing to Benchmark

Philippine English

added a link pointing to Lexical

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IMDb

Please read Wikipedia:Citing IMDb, before you use IMDb again as a reference to Wikipedia articles. Hotwiki (talk) 14:44, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

this is duly noted. thank you Mariewan (talk) 16:35, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rainbow baby

Hi Marie. I'm a bit confused about what you were trying to accomplish by changing the reference on Rainbow baby? It looks a bit like link spam but it's possible I'm wrong and you added the link in good faith. It's a bit easier to determine someone's intent when they write an edit summary as no one can read each other's minds. I hope this experience wasn't too off-putting. Let me know if you have any further questions, or you could ask at the teahouse. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 23:08, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Honest mistake. Thank you by the way for calling me out. I checked the original link on it and found it to be a bare link. So, I changed the citation but still linked the old one. Got it by mistake. However, I changed it already. Mariewan (talk) 00:08, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is duly noted. Will message you for further questions, if necessary/ Thanks again. Mariewan (talk) 00:09, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good day! Just a question. I have been including brief explanations for the changes I have made in the last articles, just as they are published. However, one editor messaged me and said that these notes I put do not appear elsewhere on Wikipedia. Should I put my explanation for my edits on the talk page of each article. Looking forward to your response. Mariewan (talk) 16:22, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries do appear in the history of the article. But the edit summaries you have been adding do not explain why you are removing existing citations and replacing them with less reliable ones. MrOllie (talk) 16:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 4

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Content similarity detection

added links pointing to Verbatim and Criterion

Cycling in the Philippines

added links pointing to Register and National highway

Postpartum depression

added links pointing to Genetic and Severity

Dog walking

added a link pointing to Benchmark

Music of the Philippines

added a link pointing to Basal

Online shopping

added a link pointing to Portal

Paintball

added a link pointing to Indoor

Palarong Pambansa

added a link pointing to Elementary

Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism

added a link pointing to Print

Sierra Madre (Philippines)

added a link pointing to Remote

South Korean television dramas in the Philippines

added a link pointing to South Korean

Surrogacy laws by country

added a link pointing to Brazilian

Teaching English as a second or foreign language

added a link pointing to Native

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits

Hello, please stop trying to add citations unless you have extensively researched a topic or have deep knowledge about it. The reference you added to Sleepover did not in any way match the article text and reference–text integrity is vitally important here. Also, references are not needed in lead sections, which are supposed to summarise the rest of the article. Because of the warnings above and because Wikipedia does not have the resources to evaluate extensive high-volume changes like yours, I have mass-rollbacked your article edits ... I simply don't trust them. I appreciate your responsiveness to talk page concerns here, but if you continue your current editing pattern, you might unfortunately be blocked. Graham87 (talk) 05:04, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am evaluating the edits of yours that the mass-rollback didn't catch. your edit to Surrogacy laws by country had a completely misleading edit summary; not only did it replace a citation along with add them, it also added extreme overlinking to articles about countries and other things. See the linked guideline under the word "overlinking" for more details about Wikipedia's style guide regarding this matter. Graham87 (talk) 05:32, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See this edit summary of mine regarding your most recent edit; one more citation addition and you'll be blocked. Graham87 (talk) 07:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!I will do my best to review the edits I made previously and will get back to you. I'm still getting the hang of editing works here on Wikipedia and I surely would appreciate any help I can get. Thanks Mariewan (talk) 11:25, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, just assumed that lead paragraphs also need citations. I apologize. Mariewan (talk) 11:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, here is a list of articles you edited just on 4 and 5 November to add citations to the lead, which were subsequently reverted by other editors:

New editors often gravitate to making changes to the lead, perhaps because it is the first thing you see at the top of the article. This is almost always a bad idea, as special standards apply to editing the lead. May I suggest that in order to remain in good standing, you stop editing the lead altogether, and only make changes to the body of articles (i.e., anything after the first section heading) until you have a better sense of the policies and guidelines at Wikipedia. Mathglot (talk) 01:35, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked and unblocked

Extended content

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Graham87 (talk) 12:37, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Despite your assurance above that you wouldn't add references to article lead sections, you went and did so at Journalism during the Marcos dictatorship. I have checked or reverted all of your edits, because Wikipedia needs protection from people with your editing style. The commas you added after the words "approximately" and "although" in your edits to insomnia and Kopi luwak, respectively, would not be added by a competent English speaker, and suggest your use of some sort of semi-automated grammar checker, perhaps to game your edit count. If you want to edit Wikipedia, please do so in your native language. Graham87 (talk) 12:37, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, in an earlier message, you said you'd review your previous edits, but you never did. That does not show much reliability. Graham87 (talk) 12:53, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They said that less than two hours before you blocked them so "never" seems a bit much Graham. You really don't get it, do you? This kind of treatement of new editors is not acceptable, and the MOS is not enforcable, it is advice.

Mariewan, I suggest you appeal this block, I think you will find that it is not supported by policy or normal expected standards from our administrators. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 22:35, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Graham87, I think the reaction to this block has been pretty clear. Would you care to lift it, please? -- asilvering (talk) 01:04, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have lifted it, with great reluctance and not a great deal of optimism. Just Step Sideways, they said they'd review their edits on 25 October, as I tried to link above. I will continue to monitor their edits. Graham87 (talk) 01:29, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @Graham87. @Mariewan, good luck. -- asilvering (talk) 01:32, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mentorship

Hi! If you end up unblocked (as Just Step Sideways advised you to appeal), I would be glad to take you as a mentee. You'll be able to ask me questions through your homepage (or directly through my talk page) if you want guidance about anything. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Chaotic Enby, they're unblocked. All yours. -- asilvering (talk) 01:34, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

After all that: a very belated welcome

Hi Mariewan, I'm another experienced editor here. You are not blocked any more; the administrator who blocked you, Graham87, realised he'd made a mistake. Some of your changes to articles have been put back. I've changed a heading above and hidden the discussion. This is your user talk page, so you can delete the section, or anything else on this page, if you want to. Chaotic Enby has offered to mentor you, and I also recommend the Teahouse, which is a noticeboard for new editors to ask questions; the people there are very good at explaining our sometimes very complicated rules and terminology. I've also put a welcome template at the top of this page, which gives you links to explanation pages as well as the Teahouse and our regular help desk. I regret that the person who started your talk page didn't think to do so; if you find the big list of links to rules and guidelines more off-putting than useful, then just remove it or ignore it.

I want to thank you for trying to help us build and improve the encyclopaedia, and I hope you'll return to editing. If there's anything you don't understand, please ask. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:01, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seconding the Teahouse, certainly a very good place to ask questions! It's way more beginner-friendly than a lot of our noticeboards and policy pages. Also sharing my guide for new users if you want! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:06, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]