User talk:Cc330162

Cc330162, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Cc330162! 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 Cordless Larry (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:05, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Danny DeVito, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Geolodus (talk) 05:48, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Seamus Coughlin for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Seamus Coughlin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seamus Coughlin until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 22:48, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Cc330162. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Seamus Coughlin, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the COI guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See WP:PAID. See more info at the AfD nomination page. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 00:21, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you.

September 2019

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove an Articles for deletion notice or a comment from an AfD discussion, as you did at Seamus Coughlin. Praxidicae (talk) 17:08, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing valid templates from the above article. All that will happen is you will be blocked from editing and the templates will be restored. It is not helpful.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:03, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some advice

The Coughlin article was pretty well written and structured. You put some hard work into it, but it had a fatal flaw in that he is not notable based on the sources, and will likely be deleted because there aren't enough independent reliable sources. You cannot do much about that, short of finding good WP:RS, which as far as I can see, do not exist. But you can certainly edit other articles or create articles on notable subjects. Removing valid templates form pages is one way to go in response, but your tenure on Wikipedia will be very short in that case. Additionally, people will be less likely to help you learn or answer questions, as when you're disruptive you are taking up the time of other editors who understand the rules. So learn the rules. You look like you could be a good editor once you understand the WP:GNG and WP:RS rules. The first rule you should actually learn is how to WP:SIGN your posts! ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:15, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2019

Regarding your recent edit here [1] to the Generation article, please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia:Reliable sources before adding "Boomers" and "Zoomers" as alternative names. Also in your edit, I saw that you removed the Xennials section, which I later removed since it is not a major generational category [2]. Again in your edit, I'm not sure why you changed the Singapore part without providing any reliable sources, but I reverted it back and found a source that supported the previous text [3]. Someone963852 (talk) 23:03, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Antifa (United States), you may be blocked from editing. Note also that we take the word "terrorist" very seriously - this has been discussed on the talk page numerous times. There have been no government statements calling the movement errorist and the US government has made it clear that it does not call domestic groups (and Antifa is not a group) terrorist. Doug Weller talk 12:05, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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-1932 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.

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 12:05, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Philip K. Dick

I have no objection to the series template being placed somewhere in the article, but it shouldn't crowd the lead section. Viriditas (talk) 23:15, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020

Hello, I'm Aguy777. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Boy band seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Aguy777 (talk) 00:46, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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) 01:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]