User talk:Will0608

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to List of Liverpool F.C. records and statistics has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: List of Liverpool F.C. records and statistics was changed by Will0608 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.957878 on 2020-11-07T21:23:51+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 21:23, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at List of Liverpool F.C. managers, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Vizzinifezzikwomanchuck (talk) 22:57, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Will0608! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like I JethroBT (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:01, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, James Bond in popular culture. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – James_Bond#Cultural_impact. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at James_Bond#Cultural_impact. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. PamD 07:34, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In your attempt to create a new article James Bond in popular culture by copying from James_Bond#Cultural_impact you were stealing the work of many other Wikipedia editors and claiming it as your own. Do not do this. (You also left your "new" article as a complete mess, because many of the references used were not defined within the section you stole, so did not work).

See WP:Copying within Wikipedia and WP:SPLITTING. PamD 07:38, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Mattythewhite. Welcome to Wikipedia! I just wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions were not quite right. When updating statistics within the infobox of a footballer, please make sure you update the timestamp at the same time, so that both readers and fellow editors know when the information was last updated.

You can do this by replacing the existing timestamp within the |club-update= or |pcupdate= parameter for club stats, or the |nationalteam-update= or |ntupdate= parameter for international stats. For articles that use a DMY date format, use five tildes (~~~~~), or for MDY dates, use {{subst:mdytime}}. This will generate the specific time the update was made.

If you have any questions about this, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you, Mattythewhite (talk) 17:53, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Tarl N.. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Gaius Marius, 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 the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Your edits were uncited (everything added to Wiki must be backed up with a reference to an external source), as well as showing opinion rather than facts. Tarl N. (discuss) 19:44, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The content you added was copied from another website, and thus was a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Please don't add copyright material to Wikipedia. — Diannaa 🇨🇦 (talk) 13:38, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Augustus 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for 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.

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.
The material on pages 94 & 95 of the Eck source is not relevant to what you've added; it has nothing at all to say on the matter. Despite your addition having been removed by two editors as inaccurate, you keep adding it, without edit summary to justify it, or any explanation on the talk-page. So you're not only edit warring; you're also refusing to communicate with others to help resolve the disagreement. Haploidavey (talk) 05:06, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this editor is even aware of their talk page. Tarl N. (discuss) 05:12, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That would make some kind of sense, User:Tarl_N.. Something ought to...the editor adds material at a dizzying rate, and most of it seems sound enough, though unsourced. That doesn't make much sense to me, given the history of unacknowledged copying (and can't see any evidence of that since the warnings given on this page). Some edits are at least arguable but I wouldn't call many outright wrong; none that I've read through, anyway; and some are well written. The editor seems to think that communication with others is an option, not necessity. I've googled for unacknowledged original sources, with no clear results. Yoo hoo, Will0608, are you there? Haploidavey (talk) 06:11, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Haploidavey: It's a not-uncommon situation. The usual fix is for an administrator to impose a block, which will force the editor to respond on their talk page before allowing further edits. That often gets their attention. If you spot more problematic edits, ask an administrator or post a new section at WP:ANI describing the problem. Tarl N. (discuss) 20:50, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Brindisi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marcus Aemilius Lepidus. 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) 06:17, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Liverpool women's team has its own article per the hatnote in Liverpool F.C. which is about the men's team only. The same applies to other clubs. No Great Shaker (talk) 14:02, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User talk:No Great Shaker. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Jr8825 • Talk 22:09, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:58, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]