User talk:Scottish12345678

Scottish12345678, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Scottish12345678! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Rosiestep (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:21, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 2015

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Foreign relations of Mexico with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:27, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Foreign relations of South Korea may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Trade between the two countries continued to increase nonetheless, Furthermore, China]] has attempted to mediate between [[North Korea]] and the [[United States]] and between [[North

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:26, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Foreign relations of South Korea may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

by the following administration of [[President]] [[Roh Moo-hyun]], economic ties between the two [[countries have increased, humanitarian aid has been sent to [[North Korea]] and some divided
* Scale of bilateral [[trade between two nation is US $ 1.94 billion.<ref>[http://www.mofat.go.kr/english/regions/asia/

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:00, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Foreign relations of South Korea may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

* [[Macedonian Prime Minister [[Nikola Gruevski]] has visited [[South Korea]] in July 2014.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:43, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Foreign relations of Georgia

added a link pointing to Georgia

Foreign relations of the Netherlands

added a link pointing to Nederland

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:56, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Foreign relations of Costa Rica

added a link pointing to San José

Foreign relations of El Salvador

added a link pointing to Salvador

Foreign relations of the Netherlands

added a link pointing to Nederland

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:57, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 2015

Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 11:50, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Overlinking

Hi. I notice you've been doing a lot of good work on the Foreign relations of South Korea article and others. Thanks for that.

However, you have also been over linking. Adding wiki links to words that are common and/or not related to the topic detracts from the legibility of the article and, just as importantly, leaves the user confused as to which links are significant to the topic, and which aren't. It is also not required to link every mention of a term. Usually the first time it occurs in a major section is enough.

For instance, on the Foreign relations of South Korea article you have linked;

President - not directly related to the topic and a common word very unlikely to confuse a reader of a topic such as this.
countries - a reader of this article will be familiar with the concept.
world - the reader is very unlikely to need to refer to this link to understand it
South Korea and North Korea - these have been linked practically on every mention. The reader does not need constantly reminded of these articles.

Please read guidelines about linking here. Don't feel too bad, linking is such a useful thing that it's easy to get carried away with it! Thanks. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 12:08, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not be put off doing the good work that you are doing on Foreign relations of South Korea. But you need to understand;

Overlinking is bad. It has reached the stage that editing in my browser is nearly impossible because it struggles with the number of links that you are adding multiple times on words that are not necessary.
If you do not use the edit summary, it will remain difficult for other editors to follow or understand what you are doing. Wikipedia relies on communication and co-operation between editors.
I am still concerned that you may be using two different accounts to do your edits. I've already pointed out to Irish12345678 that use of multiple accounts is only permitted in specific circumstances.

Thanks. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 15:22, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 2015, continued

Hello, I'm Denisarona. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Foreign relations of South Korea without 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; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the 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. Denisarona (talk) 15:45, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

Why did you revert my edits on the Foreign relations of South Korea article? I have fully explained to you why they were done, and yet you refuse to co-operate, explain or discuss any of your edits. If you don't explain why you did them I will revert. Please also note that I am likely to report you for your use suspected use of multiple accounts.

To be clear. What you are reverting to contains;

gross overlinking that makes the article difficult to read and almost impossible to edit
grammatical errors, to the extent that the reader will not understand what you are writing.

You do not own this article and you cannot refuse to let others edit it. It is possible for us both to improve this article, and it would be a pity for your efforts to be wasted simply because you cannot co-operate with other editors. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:56, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 2015, continued

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Foreign relations of South Korea. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Denisarona (talk) 04:35, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Denisarona (talk) 04:48, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish12345678, if you continue to revert at Foreign relations of South Korea without waiting for consensus you may be blocked for edit warring. You have even blanked the page, which is usually considered vandalism. If you continue to edit both with this account and with Special:Contributions/Irish12345678 you will be in more trouble. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 14:24, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent new articles

I see that you have created multiple pages about international relations in rapid succession. However, I doubt that any of them conform with the usual practice in writing such articles. I suggest that you read other articles of this kind for reference, and refer to guidelines such as WP:LAYOUT to make them more encyclopedic. Furthermore, it is best that you write in draft space and go through the AFC procedure so that the articles are reviewed and properly developed before they appear in mainspace. Please reply so that we can try to improve these articles. The Average Wikipedian (talk) 04:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish12345678 (with courtesy flag to The Average Wikipedian) Echoing that comment, your recent set of new article "contributions" basically rips the data from a single web site and partitions it to various "articles". I would contend that this may represent WP:COPYVIO. Firstly, although the site being ripped is a Korean government site, the content is very clearly marked Copyright ⓒ 2013 MOFA. All Rights Reserved. Secondly, there is no effort to contextualize or integrate the material into some work product that has distinct emergent cohesiveness. So thirdly, why would we want to cut and paste this over to WP, when it's going to be updated on the primary site from which you are spending your time porting over to WP? Accordingly, I have tagged one of these articles for WP:CSD input regarding this concern. If you are planning on contextualizing or expanding these articles, please state your intention. FeatherPluma (talk) 05:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish12345678 (with courtesy flag to The Average Wikipedian) May I politely suggest that you await a determination regarding this concern before continuing on with posting yet more new articles of this type? I see that you've just posted another new article, so I tagged it for review as well. FeatherPluma (talk) 06:23, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked you for 24 hours to stem the flow of copyright-infringing articles. You can still edit this page, so if you think that your articles are not copyright infringements or can't understand why they are, you can post messages to me or other editors here. You may get a quicker response if you start your message by linking to an editor's user name eg User:Jimfbleak, The Average Wikipedian or FeatherPluma which will notify whichever of us is on-line at the time Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:59, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign relations of South Korea

I have (again) performed a clean up of Foreign relations of South Korea. I want to be sure that you understand what I am doing, and again ask you to stop reverting my edits.

You are overlinking to a massive degree. This makes reading and editing the article very difficult. I am removing the superfluous links.
Your additions frequently contain bad English grammar. I am correcting this.
You do not own this article. You cannot stop other editors editing it.
Wikipedia relies on communication and co-operation between editors. As long as you refuse to communicate in any way with anyone else, you are making things very difficult for yourself and others.

--Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 13:51, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Escape Orbit, if the addition of inappropriate material continues once my block on this account expires, I'll reblock Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:32, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 year for persistent vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:04, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Scottish12345678, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 21:35, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for a period of indefinite for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Scottish12345678. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 03:33, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Scottish12345678, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 14:54, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]