Torbslifre

Your submission at Articles for creation: Star Wars canon media (January 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Zxcvbnm was:  The comment the reviewer left 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Star Wars canon media and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Star Wars canon media, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

_{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 01:08, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 09:16, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

2b2t edit

Hello!

Thank you for changing my edit to "toxic", that is exactly what I was meaning to say and I couldn't find the right word.

I appreciate it!

-Snippy SnippyWiki (talk) 01:06, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Revert on Richard B. Spencer's page.

Hello. I would like to ask why my edit on Richard B. Spencer's page was reverted. TrickshotsBSYT (talk) 01:00, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

The short description of a person should always highlight the label they are most commonly referred to under, and in Spencer’s case the consensus has been that "white supremacist" is more fitting in the short description than "neo-nazi". This is based on the fact that the RS-sources in the article most commonly refer to him under the "white supremacist"-label.

An identical change as the one you made has been reverted in the past, but if you feel neo-nazi is a more fitting title in the short description, feel free to open a discussion in the article’s talk page, and a clear consensus can be made. Torbslifre (talk) 01:16, 6 October 2022 (UTC)