User talk:SwordofStorms

Welcome!

Hello, SwordofStorms, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to Talk:Samus Aran does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers:

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --KRAPENHOEFFER! TALK 04:57, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A personal note that you should also review WP:BLP, and review the currently active Discretionary Sanctions surrounding articles that are related to the Gamergate controversy. --KRAPENHOEFFER! TALK 05:00, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Krapenhoeffer: It's worth noting that talk page entries do not have to be NPOV. Thanks. | Naypta^✉ opened his mouth at 08:33, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Other edits were indicative of POV-pushing, and the edits on the talk page were libelous in nature. This was just the best template I could find for the situation. --KRAPENHOEFFER! TALK 14:30, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, SwordofStorms. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by | Naypta^✉ opened his mouth at 08:29, 2 September 2015 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

As I failed to follow the proper procedure

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

--KRAPENHOEFFER! TALK 14:54, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Languages of North America, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. BilCat (talk) 19:28, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than removing my factually correct edits wouldn't it have been more prescient to simply add the sources used on the pages linked of the three distinct North American dialects I added? I get the policy, just a critique of how you go about correcting peopleSwordofStorms (talk) 19:39, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If I'd been familiar enough with the topic, I might have done that, especially if I'd had access to the sources. But to be honest, that's your responsibility, as you added the content. If you need help citing the sources, I'm happy to help out, but I don't have the time to run down every unsourced edit I find, nor should I. I'm sorry if that sounds callous, but as the person adding the content, you're the one most familiar with where it came from, and thus the best person to cite your own additions. BilCat (talk) 19:57, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]