User talk:Poopykibble

Welcome!

Hi Poopykibble! 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

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 01:00, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Dee's Big Nuts

The article Dee's Big Nuts has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable book; possibly created as a joke.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. EDM fan 2 (talk) 19:32, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Dee's Big Nuts for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dee's Big Nuts is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dee's Big Nuts until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

EDM fan 2 (talk) 19:32, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page.

You created the article Dee's Big Nuts as a joke, and the plot description you wrote out was extremely long and deliberately crude. Your third ever edit appears to be a joke as well, as nobody was ever going to think that a point of light on a glass is an Alka Seltzer tablet. In a number of other edits, including this one, this one, this one, and this one, you added unsourced, ungrammatical, and even unreadable content.

Your edits have required other editors to commit a substantial amount of time to clean up, and some of them could be credibly described as vandalism, and as such I would normally pursue some sort of block. Nonetheless, I do think that you deserve the benefit of the doubt, since many of these edits were made months ago and you were not promptly notified of the issues with them. In addition, in my view, it helps that you came clean that you had created the Dee's Big Nuts page as a joke, that you apologized, and that you promptly came out in favor of deletion. Going forward, I strongly recommend that every edit you make is extensively checked for grammatical errors, that any new content you add is reliably sourced, and that it has true encyclopedic value. Thank you. Cpotisch (talk) 07:28, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see how my edits are ungrammatical or unreadable, but i see how they are unsourced. Poopykibble (talk) 21:31, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also I mostly do minor edits so it seems unnecessary to source them Poopykibble (talk) 21:33, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit, you added, quote, "See the template below for easy access to all the countries.all the countries." This one and this one are missing conjunctions, have poorly placed commas, ungainly use of numerals, and redundant information (for example, you don't need to to say the words ‘gas station’ twice in a short sentence). This one calls a nickname a "nicked named". This one and this one tell the reader to "scroll down", which we never do on this site, especially considering that your text had no punctuation despite being in the body. All of these add up to a hell of a lot of cleanup work for other editors, and those are just the explicit grammatical issues. Every edit of yours that added or changed even a moderate amount of prose made the article difficult to read. Cpotisch (talk) 23:35, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wow I was not expecting that much... I am so sorry Poopykibble (talk) 02:39, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to review my edits more, then. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Poopykibble (talk) 02:39, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So for the ones that tell the reader to scroll down, I found out why I wrote that. The device I was using when I made that edit had a smaller screen, and the table was so wide that it took up the entire page, so the table and images would not fit on the same line. That meant the images left a big empty space in the middle of the page. I was unaware that the pictures and table would fit on the same line on a larger device. Sorry! Poopykibble (talk) 04:55, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Poopykibble! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, How to make a redirect in source mode?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:04, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Poopykibble! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Anywhere to add suggestions to Wikipedia?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Poopykibble! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Whats the name of the template, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

TarnishedPath^talk 02:06, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. This is a standard message to inform you that post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Contentious topics are the successor to the former discretionary sanctions system, which you may be aware of. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. For a summary of difference between the former and new system, see WP:CTVSDS. Doug Weller talk 09:20, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please note especially that Andy Ngo has active arbitration remedies:

You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances)
Changes challenged by reversion may not be reinstated without affirmative consensus on the talk page

See the notice at the talk page for further info. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:58, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]