User talk:Zevabelle40

Help me edit my user Not working

June 2024

Hello, I'm Johnj1995. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Paloma Faith, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Johnj1995 (talk) 21:43, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EastEnders Images

Your recent editing history 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.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

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.

I noticed that your reuploads to the respective files of Cindy Beale, Lauren Branning, Stacey Slater are pretty unnecessary and come off as if your priorities lie in personal preference, and not bettering their respective articles, supported by the Jane Beale image war. With all due respect, you are a talented editor, but your subjective overwriting of files is becoming excessive. FishLoveHam (talk) 21:21, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With respect User:FishLoveHam. The images I’ve uploaded are for a reason. Lauren’s is blurry, Cindy is looking away from the camera and Stacey’s is four years old. Zevabelle40 (talk) 21:57, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sugababes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page O2 Arena. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 08:35, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Big Brother (British TV series) series 21 (July 31)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Big Brother (British TV series) series 21 instead.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This draft appears to have been copied into article space without attribution, known as a copy-paste. A history merge has been requested in order to provide attribution to the contributions for this draft.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Big Brother (British TV series) series 21 and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 16:13, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Zevabelle40! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Robert McClenon (talk) 16:13, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"'Not neccesary' is not valid reason to revert something."

The most effective way to challenge another user's view about a graph being unnecessary is to explain why that graph is necessary. Try that next time. And do read Wikipedia:Solutions looking for a problem. KyleJoan^talk 23:27, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:45, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]