User talk:Yebrehu23

January 2023

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that your recent edit to Amharic did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! LandLing 10:58, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Now you give the impression of not wanting to see Harari language included in this place, without giving an adequate reason beyond "I don't like it". Harari is as good as an example for a South Semitic language as is Argobba, and precisely because it is not as close as Argobba it is good to include it in the list to show the range of the phenomenon. Again, I don't object to the inclusion of Argobba, but now for the third time you have removed reference to Harari without giving valid reasons, which is a behavior that approaches what is called edit warring - something you quickly need to leave behind if you want editing Wikipedia to become a good experience for you. LandLing 12:33, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, thanks for using an edit summary this time! LandLing 12:37, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023

Your recent editing history at Oromo people 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. Drmies (talk) 23:06, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Changing wording of quotes

Please don't change the wording of direct quotes, like you did here. If text is inside quote marks, the wording of the original source needs to be preserved - you can't go about changing it. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:28, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]