64.189.18.35

April 2024

Hello, I'm Broc. An edit that you recently made to Isabel, Princess Imperial of Brazil seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, 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! Broc (talk) 11:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Waldstein family, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. The Master of Hedgehogs ^{(converse) (hedgehogs)} 12:52, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at North African campaign, you may be blocked from editing. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 06:03, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at North African campaign. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 07:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

About red link removal

Hello, I've noticed that you are removing valid red links on a large number of articles. Red links are a valuable part of Wikipedia. I would encourage you to review the editing guideline WP:REDLINKS. It states: Good red links help Wikipedia—they encourage new contributors in useful directions, and remind us that Wikipedia is far from finished. In general, a red link should remain in an article if there is a reasonable expectation that the article in question will eventually be created (either as its own article or as a redirect); remove red links if and only if Wikipedia should not have any coverage on the subject ...please do not "kill" red links by redirect because their red color (annoying to some readers) seems to scream for a fix. It is easy to turn any red link blue by creating a redirect, but valid red links exist for a reason, and they are the "buds" from which new Wikipedia articles grow.

If you could use your edit summary to explain why you think removing a red link is needed that would be helpful. 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 by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks, -- Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 06:19, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Why am iblcodd some of the red links were meaningless! As weas the text that could not be divided or had source that could jtk be visifeed. 64.189.18.35 (talk) 10:25, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

---