RNutske

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Simplified Manual of Style

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

• Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
• Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
• Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
• No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
• If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
• Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
• Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! MPS1992 (talk) 01:45, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Suicide

You need to stop making changes to large amounts of articles to suit your own preference. Your changes are not in accordance with any Wikipedia guideline. Natureium (talk) 01:54, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

April 2019

Please stop. Wikipedia is not censored. Any further changes which have the effect of censoring an article will be regarded as vandalism. If you continue in this manner, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Natureium (talk) 01:59, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Paul Lafargue. Making mass changes in opposition with at least two editors and reverting is disruptive. Natureium (talk) 02:18, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Via the page you linked: "Even if misguided, willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism. For example, edit warring over how exactly to present encyclopedic content is not vandalism. Careful consideration may be required to differentiate between edits that are beneficial, edits that are detrimental but well-intentioned, and edits that are vandalism. If it is clear that the editor in question is intending to improve Wikipedia, those edits are not vandalism, even if they violate some other core policy of Wikipedia." The edits I'm making are good faith efforts to improve the grammatical accuracy of articles that deal with subjects who have taken their lives.

Please cite source for the quote "Making mass changes in opposition with at least two editors and reverting is disruptive." RNutske (talk) 02:25, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

This has been discussed at length in multiple places. Consensus at Talk:Robin Williams and Talk:Anthony Bourdain, for example, is that "commit" is still the common term, and it's what is used in those articles (between edit-wars at least :| ). Wikipedia is not a forum for social WP:ADVOCACY. Until sources drop the term, it's going to be hard to get editors to agree to do so here. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 07:50, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Please also see WP:RGW and other sections of that page. It is unlikely that a new editor, such as yourself, would find something legitimately wrong with a large number of articles maintained by a large number of active, picky editors. If you do think you have stumbled upon such a problem, you really need to discuss it with other editors first. Not doing so can be considered disruptive, but excusable for a new editor. However, once you've been made aware that the changes are controversial and you continue to edit-war over them, it makes it hard for others to assume good faith. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 08:55, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

You need WP:Consensus of regular page editors for such changes, which at present you have not obtained. Kierzek (talk) 14:08, 4 April 2019 (UTC)