Dfsjlk1

If i am doing anything wrong send help.

no description Dfsjlk1 (talk) 05:32, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

August 2024

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Bedford Road Collegiate. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Please stop. Don't add ridiculous supposed accuracy of coordinates. Don't add unsourced content. Don't add puffery. Don't break the WP:MOS Meters (talk) 21:34, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Bedford Road Collegiate, you may be blocked from editing. Meters (talk) 06:15, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Bedford Road Collegiate. Do you understand that you may be blocked if you keep this up? Again, Don't add unsourced content. Don't add puffery. Don't break the WP:MOS. And no, copying a source to another location where it does not actually support the claims does not help. Your source does not say anything about the format of the tournament, and it does not say anything about Community Engagement. Meters (talk) 06:31, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

If you want to make those claims then find reliable sources that actually say that, and add it neutrally. Meters (talk) 06:32, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Manual of Style is what it means - it may take some time to get hang of it Dfsjlk1 (talk) 08:07, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Okay I won't add unsourced content

lack of citation is a difficult issue to fix Dfsjlk1 (talk) 08:08, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Your source does not say anything about the format of the tournament, and it does not say anything about Community Engagement. -- that's because i lied and it's not the source - more of things that i know from being at the school and news articles and staff - don't have any quotes Dfsjlk1 (talk) 08:11, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

also, if you really look into it the BRIT website doesn't even include any info that the wiki says the website is mostly blank just pictures of the events - so that's where the real sourcing issues happen - it's a new account issue Dfsjlk1 (talk) 08:17, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Please don't create virtually unsourced drafts about non-notable elementary school. I have redirected Draft:Westmount School to the school district per the norm for such subjects. Meters (talk) 06:53, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

The school is notable for certain cause which is censored - children related issues Dfsjlk1 (talk) 08:06, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

I was trying to fix the so called piping errors with the neighborhood related issues, I need to figure out the templates for the school and the odd you can't edit and must link from the page Dfsjlk1 (talk) 08:14, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

And your category Category:Elementary schools in saskatoon is not useful. The title violates the MOS, and we don't have any articles about about elementary schools in Saskatoon. It's bad enough that you created links for all of the schools by piping mention of them to the neighbourhood articles. We certainly don't need to create a category about elementary schools to hold the names of the neighbourhoods you pipe them to. Meters (talk) 07:03, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

If any of those schools have enough reliable independent sources to show their notability then WP:WTAF, but it's unlikely. Elementary schools are very rarely notable. Meters (talk) 07:05, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

neighbourhoods school pipes you mention is a important issue that needs fix and I was not aware of the MOS I will take a look into it. Independent sources will slowly overtake my ideas - it's a matter of time. - Not all of the edits I make are on elementary schools. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 08:05, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Please stop. On Memento pattern you added a blog (not considered a reliable source) and another source to the lead where they were not needed and did not contribute to sourcing the content. Don't add sources simply because they mention the subject. And on JX (operating system) you made questionable changes and linked to a WP:DAB. Meters (talk) 23:43, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

And on National Collegiate Hockey Association you linked the article to itself, removed useful links, and added a link to a common term. And you took it upon yourself to rename the conferences after nine years uncontested. It does not matter if those names (e.g., "North Eastern") happen to contain grammatical errors. If that's what they were named, then those are the proper names. Do you have any evidence that those names have been incorrect in Wikipedia since 2015 (when they were changed by user:Yosemiter), or did you just make an assumption?

I'm getting tired of checking all of your edits (and of having to correct so many of them). Bad edits are disruptive, even when they are made in good faith, and continued bad edits can lead to a block. See WP:CIR. And you have already admitted to bad faith editing (that's because i lied and it's not the source - more of things that i know from being at the school and news articles and staff - don't have any quotes) on at least one occasion. Meters (talk) 00:46, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

The lead is summary of material that is covered elsewhere in the article. Unless the material it is particularly controversial, lead material does not need sourcing, as the material should be sourced elsewhere in the article. Don't add sources to leads.

Don't use Wikipedia mirrors as sources.

And on GTK you added a source that, once again, does not support the claim. Sources are there to support specific claims. Once again, do not add supposed sources simply because they mention the subject.Meters (talk) 01:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Your edit to Talk:Bedford Road Invitational Tournament has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Meters (talk) 04:23, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I understand the legal complications involved with the matter and the same won't happen again. Thank you for removing it in a timely manner. - I also don't really understand how the talk page works. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 04:31, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Article talk pages are to discuss changes to the specific article. See WP:NOTAFORUM. Meters (talk) 05:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Bedford Road Collegiate. And on Talk:Bedford Road Invitational Tournament . Follow the WP:MOS. you have been pointed to this more than once but you continue to ignore it. Don't use subsections for every entry in what should be list. Don't copy copyrighted material to the talk pages (or anywhere else). Write neutrally. We don't use flowery PR-speak such as "This joint celebration highlights the unity and collaborative spirit within the city's educational community." Meters (talk) 05:06, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

And how many times do I have to tell you not to add sources that do not support specific claims? A user-generated album of alumni-shared photos of a reunion does not support the claims about the school's facilities. Meters (talk) 05:12, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Inside the pictures there are information about the history of the school next time I will cite the page it's on. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 21:11, 31 August 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 Ukrainian Catholic Eparchy of Saskatoon. Meters (talk) 21:12, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Elementary schools in saskatoon

A tag has been placed on Category:Elementary schools in saskatoon indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:33, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

its fine since its against MOS Dfsjlk1 (talk) 08:49, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

sandboxing these would be a good idea or else it is considered vandalism Dfsjlk1 (talk) 08:51, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited JX (operating system), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Domains. 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) 19:52, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

I didn't realise that I'll try to avoid the same mistake. Also, I believe the link was there before I edited. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 03:11, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

No, the link was not there before your edit [1]. The original link was [[Domain name|domains]], a pipe from "domains" to the article Domain name. You changed it to [[domains]], which is a link that redirects to the disambiguation page Domain. If you don't understand the difference you should not be changing links. Meters (talk) 03:27, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, you may be right about that. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 04:43, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

There's no "may" about it. I even linked to your edit. Meters (talk) 04:45, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I looked into it and yes you were right about me making the mistake with the link that redirects to the disambiguation page for 'Domains' and not the 'Domain name' page - I clicked on the wrong button without considering what implication it could have. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 04:53, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I also thank you for correcting the error in a timely manner. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 04:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Josh Jacobson

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Josh Jacobson, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:10, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I respectfully request that the article be reviewed and considered for retention, as it documents the contributions of a notable local artist whose works have a lasting impact on the public spaces of Saskatoon. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 20:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Notes the hyperlinked is not a real page - empty Dfsjlk1 (talk) 20:21, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

The page appears to be gone Dfsjlk1 (talk) 20:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

no respond and I can't seem to 'contest the nomination by visiting the page' by visiting the page which don't exist. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 05:49, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the page was speedily deleted as "Unambiguous advertising or promotion" by user: Josh Jacobson [Seraphimblade],correction 20:58, 30 August 2024 (UTC) at 20:18, before you made your first post about this. Meters (talk) 19:37, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

so do I have to re upload it. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 19:57, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Cut and paste error: it was deleted by user:Seraphimblade. I can't see the deleted content, but since it was so quickly deleted it suggests that it had very serious problems, and I would suggest that you not recreate it. Unless you have significant material and reliable sources to show notabilitand can write it in a neutral manner it would likely just be deleted again. Meters (talk) 20:58, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Meters is correct. Were you to "reupload" that, you would be blocked from editing, as it was promotional and Wikipedia does not permit promotion of anyone or anything. However, since you left me a chatbot generated message on my talk page, I think I found the main issue—you also used a chatbot to generate that article. Chatbots will almost never generate appropriate article content; they should be written in your own words, not by a bot. While I'm not trying to be mean in any way, I'm not certain your own proficiency in English seems to be up to the task of writing an article. There are Wikipedias in many languages, so it might be better for you to participate in one of those using a language you're more comfortable in until your proficiency in English has improved. But we're really not interested in any chatbot-written stuff; article content would need to be written by you. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:05, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Are you also using a non-rationed bot? And it's AI-assisted edits which there is no guideline for. I prompted it in ways which desire me and who says I am using a chatbot? I am proficient in English. It's your error in nominating a page which wasn't spam. There is more to it than the words people write YES. Your preoccupation with 'chatbot-written content' is as significant to me as Schrödinger’s cat’s opinion on string theory. The final text is my input. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 22:23, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Schrödinger’s cat’s opinion on string theory I love that phrase! I have certainly got to give you points on that one. As to the rest—this is coming up more and more, and as I was trying to respond to you, I realized it was getting overly long for a talk page message, and also that I'll probably end up repeating myself a lot. So I'm going to write something up really quick in my userspace regarding chatbots and what problems they cause; I will provide a link to that as soon as I'm done with it. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:17, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

After you do that fix your bot and stop taking down pages without good reason. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 23:26, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

It’s funny the way we deal with common tactics like disambiguation pages and spam. How unique of you to set up a bot to do your dirty work. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 23:37, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Uh, which bot are you talking about? From what I understand, Seraphimblade deleted the page on their own after I marked it for speedy deletion. No bot was involved, only the judgement of two independent editors. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:57, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

For context, I was the one who marked the page for speedy deletion (see Wikipedia:G11 for the criterion), not Seraphimblade or a bot. You did receive a pre-written message (thanks to Wikipedia:Twinkle) to inform you of the speedy deletion, but the decision itself was made by a human. (If you're curious, this is the reason why we use boilerplate messages instead of writing it by hand each time) Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 12:02, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

That may be where the confusion is. I also use Twinkle (which you can find information on here), but in short, it's not a bot, it's just a helper script. Twinkle does not do anything unless I explicitly tell it to do it; it just assists in getting it done. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 15:09, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

A script but not a bot: Does it help automate anything? I am asking you to reconsider, and I have provided reasons—there is Notability, verifiability, and Neutral Tone. It can be edited by other people if they don't like the flavour. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 19:46, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

It depends what you mean by "automate". If, for example, I want to propose a page for deletion, then Twinkle will handle the "paperwork" for that—creating the nomination page, placing the appropriate template on the article, notifying whoever should be notified, and so on. But it's still me who decides to nominate the page, and me who writes the rationale as to why. Twinkle just does the tedious parts. It wouldn't decide on its own to go nominate a page for deletion, and do that without my input. As to the rest, yes, you have asked me to reconsider, and I took another look, and I stand by my decision to delete that article. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:04, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

The reason for deletion is not clear. You wouldn't have a tool trigger to know which page to go after would you. 'I stand by my decision to delete that article' unclear to why. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 20:19, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

As to why? It was promotional. As some examples, but by no means an exhaustive list: nown for his public art installations that contribute to the cultural and aesthetic landscape of the city ("known" for that by whom, according to what reliable and independent source?), His work is recognized for its vibrant, abstract style (as before, "recognized" by whom, according to what reliable, independent source?), reflects the city's unique identity and heritage. (puffery), Confluence" has quickly become a significant landmark, capturing the essence of the city's dynamic and interconnected identity. (the "source" for that is a real estate company, which would have an interest in talking stuff like that up), Another of Jacobson's remarkable creations (don't editorialize that something is "remarkable"), and it just goes on and on like that. Promotional material like that is not permitted on Wikipedia, and is speedily deleted. Articles must be written in a neutral tone, and not promote anyone or anything, including by "talking up" and puffery. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:33, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

So, it can just be edit why delete. So, I can rewrite without being blocked? Okay 'talking up' is not okay here. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 21:00, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

When editing the page would mean rewriting it mostly from scratch, there's not much point in keeping what's basically a free advertisement until someone else rewrites a neutral page. The deletion criterion that I nominated it under (WP:G11) requires that pages would need to be fundamentally rewritten to serve as encyclopedia articles, rather than advertisements. The person cleaning up behind shouldn't have to write a whole new article to fix the issues.
Yes, you can rewrite it without being blocked, although I would suggest you do it in draftspace through Wikipedia:Articles for creation, so editors can provide feedback on any potential issues. Also linking Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide just in case, if you happen to have any connection to the subject. Good luck! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 00:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't know how to move it to draft from sandbox. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 03:24, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

If you do it in your user sandbox, it's also okay, just not in mainspace. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 03:29, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Just saw the artist once when he was painting a mural. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 03:25, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

'by user: Josh Jacobson' dose not exit so it appears that your just making stuff up explain yourself. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 19:49, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that was an error. And I had already corrected it long before you posted the accusation that I am just making stuff up" .And you know that because you quoted my correction. Your comments are verging on a personal attack, and my WP:AGF is done. Meters (talk) 21:23, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

There are no personal attacks here; it might be a personal issue that affects your ability to maintain Wikipedia, where you seem to have failed. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 21:35, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I can’t see the corrected page right now, so you might be lying. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 21:37, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

You don't need to see any other page than this page. I made the original post, with the mistake at 19:37 on Aug 30 [2]. I made my timestamped correction at 20:58, Aug 30 [3]. You posted your accusation, quoting my corrected version at 19:49 Aug 31 [4] almost 24 hours later.

If you are suggesting that I might be lying about when Josh_Jacobson was deleted, just click the link. After a certain point it no matters whether an editor is WP:TROLLING or just WP:CIR. In my opinion, you are at that point. Meters (talk) 21:57, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Oh, that was you fixing the mistake okay got it. Are you calling me in competent? Dfsjlk1 (talk) 22:44, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

looking back it seems that you were lying cuz it's written which I still don't understand cuz my other draft is not gone but this one is so where did it go -- no resubmit button. The page that I wrote dose not appear. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 07:24, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Don't add non-encyclopedic information.

We do not need a list of every team that has ever entered the tournament, let alone with the time of day and scores for every game they ever played. Meters (talk) 06:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nutrien Fireworks Festival (September 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by SafariScribe were: 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:Nutrien Fireworks Festival 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.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:49, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Dfsjlk1! 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! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 06:49, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

September 2024

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at User talk:Meters. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. You repeated the might have been lying attack from this page on my talkpage, after I explained it twice, including with the specific links. As I've already said, my WP:AGF is done and After a certain point it no matters whether an editor is WP:TROLLING or just WP:CIR. In my opinion, you are at that point. Do not post on my talk page again unless it is something for which Wikipedia requires that you notify me. Meters (talk) 07:27, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

There was no attack made on anyone. The links are not clear. 'might have been lying' is not a personal attack it would be a question of competence. 'In my opinion, you are at that point' is an attack. Yes, it did require me to notify you. I did not repeat the attack I am mentioning the Josh Jacobson page is deleted and I can't find it and that you have not fixed it in a friendly way so you would go find the page for me which you still have not done but it's fine. Your personal experience are not mine to account for. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 08:57, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

It can appear as a personal attack even though the person on the other side may not know about it. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 08:58, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Did you even look at the article? Please don't add "citation needed" tags to individual claims when the entire sections are already tagged as needing citations. That's why I added those templates. Meters (talk) 07:27, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

What you're referring to is not clear. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 07:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I did not edit an article without looking at it. If citation needed and I don't want to add it myself, I will the template/tag. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 07:35, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

The header/banner template don't do a good enough job so I added another one. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 07:42, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Are you not allowed to add the unsourced template to the beginning of a page? Dfsjlk1 (talk) 07:44, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

How is this not clear? The sections in Bedford Road Invitational Tournament that are unsourced have big header templates that say that they are unsourced. You tagged individual claims in those sections with individual "citation needed" tags. Don't do that. There is no point in tagging individual claims as the entire section is unsourced. Your tags are redundant.

What do you mean Yes, I did not edit an article without looking at it? That makes no sense. Either you did read it, and ignored the existing templates when you edited it, or you did not read it before you edited.

No, we cannot use the unsourced template on the entire page as the page is partially sourced sinceit has an external link to tournament's home page.Meters (talk) 08:26, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

And even if we did move the citations needed template to the beginning of the page it would not mean that you could start adding "citation needed" tags to individual claims elsewhere in the article. Meters (talk) 08:31, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I got it. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 08:36, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Not sure if you read the first topic on my talk page but it says 'If i am doing anything wrong send help.' Dfsjlk1 (talk) 08:37, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

1. c-Meters-20240907072700-Meters-20240905072700 -- has been deleted -- Dfsjlk1 (talk) 08:42, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay I got that and thanks for removing it. 'Your tags are redundant' is unnecessary. To 'Did you even look at the article?' I said 'Yes, I did not edit an article without looking at it.' that should clear things up. I read it too many times which is why I didn't notice it. There might be a different template that I can add to it. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 08:35, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Bedford Road Collegiate. Please read and follow the Manual of Style (WP:MOS). You have been pointed to this before. Don't insert links in headers, Don't insert references in headers. Headers use sentence case (don't change that). And don't add references that do not work or do not cover the claims youa re making. You have been warned about this before too. Meters (talk) 05:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

And stop overlinking. There is no need to link the same thing multiple times, or to link common terms. See MOS:OVERLINK — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meters (talk • contribs) 06:09, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Message received. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 06:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

It's probably best to remove the school song section as there is not a better source. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 06:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

The BRIT is hosted in a place. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 06:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Note it's unrelated to the discussion. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 06:23, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Remai Modern, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Leventio (talk) 05:37, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Big Five Marathon. How many times are we going to have to go through this? Do not add claims that are not supported by your supposed sources. Meters (talk) 08:18, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Wikimedia Foundation. And stop blindly adding "citation needed" tags. Article leads do not need citations unless the information is particularly contentious. The lead is a summary of information elsewhere inthe article, and the citations are with the main material.This article even has a note that says "for sources see infobox" immediately adjacent to where you added your redundant citation needed tag. Meters (talk) 08:24, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I can't find it on the infobox there are only external links. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 19:49, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

There are four references at the bottom of the infobox: Did you even try looking at them? Meters (talk) 21:00, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Wikimedia projects - For the list, see wmf:Special:SiteMatrix and m:Complete list of Wikimedia projects. are these considered a sources? They are not cited so? Dfsjlk1 (talk) 19:56, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

References

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Bedford Road Invitational Tournament. This is the last time I am going warn you. The next time you add an improperly sourced claim I will ask that you be blocked. Fill in the ref fields properly. If you are going to reference a newspaper article then tell us all of the important info: what the article title was, who wrote it, when it was published, and who published it. And don't restored challenged material or remove requests for citations. Meters (talk) 06:24, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

I was adding source to info that didn't have a source. I was not copy editing. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 06:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Or expanding the article in anyway, I added a source to unsourced text. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 06:42, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Also, what you're referring to is not clear. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 06:45, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

I've added many sources, so you need to be more specific about it. Template comment doesn't communicate the issue. The issue might be that it included more info from other source then the one I cited but is cited in the article. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 06:49, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Your issue might be that I didn't see 'cited sources do not establish these as "notable events", and why would we mention them here even if they were?' Dfsjlk1 (talk) 06:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

I problem was that there was not enough source, so I added more source. You need to be clearer because the template comments is not working. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 06:55, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

"Bekkering Less than broken". The Taber Times. January 15, 2003. p. 11. is this what you're referring to? Dfsjlk1 (talk) 06:58, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

There are far too many problems with your various edits for me to go over each one. I am not going to continue repeating myself every time you make an improperly sourced claim, when you are not changing your problematic behaviour. I'm simply going to report you for a block if you can't or won't stop making improperly sourced claims. Go back and look at my previous warnings, Go back and look at your edits and which ones I have undone and my edit summaries. Yes, the "Bickering" source is one of the problematic sources. Fill in the ref properly. Is "Bickering less than broken" the article title? Who wrote it? As far as I can tell, while there is online access to the Taber Times for some years, 2003 is not available online. If you did find an online version then please use the link in your citation. If you do not have an online copy then please provide a quotation so we can at least see what you are referring to. Your sourcing has had so many problems that I cannot assume any offline reference you provide actually supports what you claim it does. And a 2003 ref is not going to be sufficient for a claim about the current status of the tournament. It's simply too old. If you want to claim that the tournament is a premier tournament and that scouts regularly attend it, then provide recent reliable sources that say so. If all you have is a 21-year-old reference than all you can say is that as of 2003 that was true.

As for you "adding sources", many of your edits where your summary claims you are adding or improving sources are instead you adding a "citation needed". Don't use incorrect edit summaries. And you don't seem to understand that an article lead is a summary of the sourced content of the article and does not need to be sourced in the lead. Unless there is something that is likely to be particularly contentious, the sources in the body are sufficient. You have tagged several article leads as being unsourced. Meters (talk) 08:15, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the "Bickering" source is one of the problematic sources. You did not mention there were multiple problems. There was no mention of the source needing to be online. I found it in the Wikipedia library. It's my choice to edit it the way I want, if you don't like how I write edit the summaries it's your problem. 'If you do not have an online copy then please provide a quotation so we can at least see what you are referring to.' I was not aware of this police. By offline do you mean real life or inaccessible (clickable) on the open web? Tournament is popular and the proof is that it was covered in the media. 'It's simply too old.' are you stating that old sources are invalid? If you look at the source that I added there are many different types of sources new and old -- your coworkers might have seen it. 'If all you have is a 21-year-old reference then all you can say is that as of 2003 that was true.' who says that is the only source I have? Is citation needed is not important? Like info without a source is okay. Is that what you're trying to say? 'Don't use incorrect edit summaries' is a template comment so now you know how every editor feels. You might have also not looked at all of the edits I am making -- what you're referring to is unclear. 'And you don't seem to understand that an article lead is a summary of the sourced content of the article and does not need to be sourced in the lead.' Where does it say you don't need to add a source to the lead/top section? How do you know its source and if it is it would have two footnotes of the same source. If I am stating it's unsourced it probably means it's unsourced, a source somewhere else on the page does not matter to me because it's not where it's supposed to be. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 01:23, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 8

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Noakhali riots, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Established and Government of Bengal.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank You I didn't notice that and I'll avoid doing that. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 08:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

That notice is from an automated bot. There is no-one to respond to. And the message means that you should go back and fix the DAB links that you added. Meters (talk) 21:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Government of Bengal may refer to:

• Government of Bangladesh
• Government of East Bengal
• Government of West Bengal

So, I don't know which one, so I'll just remove the hyperlink Dfsjlk1 (talk) 22:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Leif Erickson Park has been accepted

Leif Erickson Park, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Dr vulpes (Talk) 21:30, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nutrien Fireworks Festival (October 18)

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

Kline • talk • contribs 02:39, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Inaccurate tagging of an article

@Dfsjlk1: Hello. Regarding your recent edit ([5]) to the 2024 Sri Lankan presidential election article, where you placed a current event maintenance template. Please note that this election is not an ongoing event; it took place on 21 September 2024. Adding this tag is unnecessary and is misleading. Kindly review and understand the article thoroughly before applying tags in your future edits. You may also refer to WP:TAGGING and WP:RESPTAG for further guidelines. QEnigma (talk) 13:31, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)