User talk:Isaacsorry

Disruptive editing at Channel Orange

Your recent bold edit has been reverted. Per the bold, revert, discuss cycle, after a bold edit is reverted, the status quo should remain while a discussion is started instead of edit-warring, and it should be resolved before reinstating the edit, after a needed consensus is formed to keep it. isento (talk) 17:03, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

There are some grammar errors with your edits as well, your edits are better then before but I suggest you work on that in the future, because some of your edits might come to some as fancruft and misleading as well. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 19:35, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Channel Orange 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. isento (talk) 21:21, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

You're not telling me what's wrong with the edits on Channel Orange. You're simply reverting; I stated what was edited in the edit summary - as you advised to do previously. Isaacsorry (talk) 09:03, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

And you're simply using an edit summary while restoring your reversion again, which does not count as discussion. It was deemed not an improvement before. You rearranged the text into a first paragraph that has no consistent topic or sense of chronology, jumping from the album's release date to background on a mixtape that is not the topic of this article and then to this album's release strategy - a fundamental oversight of relative emphasis in the lead. You removed the artist's genre with no rationale for doing so, even though it is common practice and for good reason - it provides context for readers as to who the artist of the album is. You added a note, a false one at that, about critics supposedly observing influences from Pink Floyd and Jimi Hendrix, when in fact this is a blatant misreading of what is actually said in the article. Less offensive is your insistence on hyphenating "nonmusical" when in American English, most words with the prefix non- are not hyphenated - to my recollection, you only hyphenate non- when joined with a proper noun, which "musical" is not. You also remove the story behind the album title, without explanation. isento (talk) 13:29, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

April 2020

Your addition to Neelan Tiruchelvam 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 more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. 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. — Diannaa (talk) 14:31, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Originals (Prince album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Album of the Year (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 12:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Your edit in Starboy

I have reverted your edit in the article because the sources you added are not reliable. College websites are considered unreliable in Wikipedia per WP:V. Don't just add random sources in articles that you can find in Google, there's a list of reliable and unreliable sources (WP:ALBUMSOURCE). Try to use sources that are more notable next time, thank you. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 18:04, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

May 2020

Please refrain from adding, removing or changing genres, as you did to Kala (album), without providing a source or establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Thank you. isento (talk) 19:41, 7 May 2020 (UTC)