User talk:SKINNYSODAQUEEN

Welcome!

Hello, SKINNYSODAQUEEN, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:46, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SKINNYSODAQUEEN,

I see through looking through your contributions that you state you had a previous account. Could you identify it on your User page? I'm asking because right now, you are a new editor who has made 34 edits and I think you are too inexperienced to be posting warning messages on other editors' User talk pages. Until I posted a Welcome message, you didn't even have your own User talk page, it was just a red link which is another sign of your newness to the project. Posting your previous username might dispell the perception that you are a brand new editor who shouldn't be involved with patrolling until you have been editing, solidly, for a few more months. In the meantime, most experienced editors who have been editing for years or decades won't be pleased to get warning notices from a newbie. If I'm wrong, please tell us who you were and I'll take back my words. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:51, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had it really long ago, it was my name then a random string of numbers I put, so I don't really know how to identify it.. Sorry. I didn't use it long, but I used to use Twinkle on it.
SKINNYSODAQUEEN (talk) 19:53, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Standard of Queen Camilla

The article Standard of Queen Camilla has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Content fork: everything here is already at Royal Standard of the United Kingdom#Others and Royal Standard of the United Kingdom#Consorts of the British monarch. Page created as part of a dispute, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Queen Camilla.

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. DrKay (talk) 14:58, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Following me around from page to page, undoing any of my edits that you consider inappropriate, is likely to lead to accusations of harassment. DrKay (talk) 16:07, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I undid one of your edits after noticing all of the flags were off of the members list. Calm yourself. You're saying that my undoing one nonconstructive edit of your's automatically means that I just undid nearly all of your edits, that I follow you from page to page, and that I am harassing you. Not very logical.
SKINNYSODAQUEEN (talk) 16:14, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Icons#Inappropriate use is a project-wide guideline and should be followed. DrKay (talk) 16:17, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

Your recent editing history at Queen Camilla shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Kovcszaln6 (talk) 17:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have included the correct banner used for Queen Camilla, and added a correct source. But then my edits are reverted with the wrong Standard and that remains unsourced? What type of illogic is this. How does there need to be consensus for a verifiable fact, but in the meantime the verifiable wrong fact is on there. This is so idiotic and pathetic. Ew. SKINNYSODAQUEEN (talk) 17:26, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. DrKay (talk) 17:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you SKINNYSODAQUEEN (talk) 17:26, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closing

You do not get to unilaterally close an ongoing discussion in favor of yourself when there is no consensus to do so. That is not in any way shape or form how this project operates. estar8806 (talk) ★ 17:26, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Queen Camilla. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 17:52, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]