User talk:Micheller1202

Welcome!

Hi Micheller1202! I noticed your contributions to María Elvira Salazar 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! Marquardtika (talk) 17:47, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I need a little guidance here. Who is authorized to undo edits I make?

Here is an exchange I had from some "boxing" editor. He appears to have a slant. How do we prevent our edits from being removed by anyone with an agenda?

Hello, I'm

Squared.Circle.Boxing

. I wanted to let you know that one or more of

your recent contributions

have been undone because they appeared to be promotional.

Advertising

and using Wikipedia as a "

soapbox

" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using

independent sources

, and from a

neutral perspective

. Take a look at the

welcome page

to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. —

²

.

O

.

^Boxing

13:44, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[

reply

]

If (big IF) you're not trying to promote the writers of the articles or the publication itself, the links you added are still absolutely pointless. The content is already adequately cited. I also noticed you use we in your edit summaries. How many people use your account? – ².O.^Boxing 13:44, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply][reply]

Yes, your "big if" has been realized. I follow Florida Politics, particularly DC-related officials, and read a couple of Florida-centric news websites —Florida Daily, Florida Politics, The Floridian, and The Capitolist. So what you are saying is that I cannot link to any of these websites because YOU feel I am promoting them? Tell me again how I benefit from this?

I am the only one adding to the pages. The links I have added are not pointless, they give complete context. As far as using "we," I edit and contribute with my 2 and 4-year-olds who sit next to me on the couch. So, "we" did some contributing. Just curious. It appears you may have an agenda. Your "soapbox" comment speaks to a hidden or biased agenda. Micheller1202 (talk) 03:56, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Hello, I'm Squared.Circle.Boxing. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. — ².O.^Boxing 13:44, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If (big IF) you're not trying to promote the writers of the articles or the publication itself, the links you added are still absolutely pointless. The content is already adequately cited. I also noticed you use we in your edit summaries. How many people use your account? – ².O.^Boxing 13:44, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, your "big if" has been realized. I follow Florida Politics, particularly DC-related officials, and read a couple of Florida-centric news websites —Florida Daily, Florida Politics, The Floridian, and The Capitolist. So what you are saying is that I cannot link to any of these websites because YOU feel I am promoting them? Tell me again how I benefit from this?

I am the only one adding to the pages. The links I have added are not pointless, they give complete context. As far as using "we," I edit and contribute with my 2 and 4-year-olds who sit next to me on the couch. So, "we" did some contributing. Just curious. It appears you may have an agenda. Your "soapbox" comment speaks to a hidden or biased agenda. Micheller1202 (talk) 03:56, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at User:Squared.Circle.Boxing. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contribs)} 04:31, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. – ².O.^Boxing 12:27, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Umm, you started this "edit war." So, stop because you may be blocked from editing. Micheller1202 (talk) 13:21, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This a foolish comment. Stop being disruptive or you will be referred to the Admins for removal of editing privileges. Slywriter (talk) 17:18, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

Hi, Micheller1202! I saw your post at the Teahouse. There are a lot of policies and guidelines to follow on Wikipedia, and it can take time to understand them all. One such common practice is called Bold, Revert, Discuss. It means basically to be bold in making changes, but if someone reverts/undoes the change, you can discuss the changes on the talk page. Reverted edits are pretty common on Wikipedia; it's not personal against you. People disagree all the time on a lot of things here, so the only way to get stuff done is to discuss it and get consensus.
It looks like SquaredCircleBoxing hasn't edited yet since your response. If you wait a while for the user to become active again, it'll give them a chance to respond, and hopefully resolve the issue better; it's best not to revert an editor's edits too many times. You can let me know on my talk page if you have any questions. Happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 04:58, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's you

Your account started 11 days ago, and every edit you have made to date has been reverted by other, more experienced edits. Please consider that you are wrong. Continuing to do the same thing (inserting Floridian as a ref) is wrong. Your antics have caused a number of editors to plan to keep an eye on you in the future. Either change your ways or risk being blocked for not being here to contribute to the encyclopedia. See WP:NOTHERE for that. David notMD (talk) 14:47, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]