User talk:Hitius

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Hitius, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Aboutmovies (talk) 00:32, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

Please refrain from making major edits on Wikipedia pages such as those you made to Template:Quentin Tarantino, without first discussing your changes on the article's talk page, Your edit(s) require discussion to establish consensus as this is considered a major change. Your edits do not appear to have been discussed and have been reverted. Thank you. - FlightTime (open channel) 18:43, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Echoing what FlightTime said. Please discuss major changes at Template talk:Quentin Tarantino to establish consensus. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 00:26, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 2019

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Rafael Nadal, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 07:36, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

He is not making editions, he is deleting your changes, which are not accepted by consensus in the talk page. The consensus in the talk page is that your deletions of "Nadal has won 5 Davis Cup titles" are unnecessary. James343e (talk) 12:07, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page Nadal

Hi! There is an ongoing discussion on the [[ talkpage of Nadal | talkpage of Nadal]]. You are very welcome to participate! James343e (talk) 12:07, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020

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 notice boards.
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 Rafael Nadal, you may be blocked from editing. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 00:10, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't we go through the "consensus" process already? I don't seem to remember any consensus of more than 2 people on it. What we have here is a case of someone doubling down on a mistake they made. "involved with" In what way is that language suitable for anything? Using "involved" is every bit as ridiculous as what I put in. Was the player a ball boy, or drinks man, or hitting partner?Hitius (talk) 03:50, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And just how is "was believed to have made iotas of contributions" an improvement? If you think that this is me "doubling down on a mistake I made", then that only proves that you're the one who didn't follow that process properly. If you aren't going to make meaningful contributions to the article, then please leave it alone. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 02:35, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did make a meaningful addition. I entered that the player 'won the title.' sharing news sources, including from the ITF itself. I did say that what I put in was ridiculous. But equally as ridiculous as 'involved'. First you argued over 4 or 5, then won a title or not just because you did not want to agree that it was in fact 5. By what process was 'involved' arrived at?Hitius (talk) 09:42, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is a clear-cut consensus not to say that he "won" the title (and that "contributed to/been part of/involved in" is a more encyclopaedic wording), so it was not a meaningful contribution, as you are ignoring the discussion. You are going off-topic – forget about previous arguments, as it is not relevant to this discussion. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 10:17, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]