User talk:Chumchumlol

June 2018

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Rudy Gobert 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: Rudy Gobert was changed by Chumchumlol (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.968707 on 2018-06-06T20:03:45+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 20:03, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Chumchumlol, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Chumchumlol! 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 Gestrid (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

May 2020

Hi! I wanted to let you know that I reverted your recent edit to Hawaii Five-O (1968 TV series). While a few of your changes were ok, there were several errors, both grammatical and factual, introduced by your changes. Specifically:

In two places you changed a ref name from "Snauffer" to "Snuffer". Since this was not done consistently, it breaks the references.
You changed a template parameter name from "archiveurl" to "archive URL", which breaks the template.
You removed "own" from "lacks its own radio network", which makes the meaning unclear.
You changed "Lealoha" to "Leiahola". This seems incorrect to me; do you have a citation for your spelling?
You changed the verb "guest starred" to "guests starred", which is incorrect grammar.
You changed "At the conclusion of each episode" to "After each episode" which is less correct since the narration was part of the episode.
You changed "two versions of the closing credits portion of the show" to "two versions of the portion of the closing credit of the show" which is harder to understand and arguably changes the meaning.
You changed "the 240th and final episode" to "the 240th and the final episode" which makes it sound like it's talking about two different episodes.
You changed "and that airings of the program were a weekly highlight" to "and those airings of the program were a weekly highlight" which changes the meaning.
You removed "own" from "sang his own made-up lyrics" which makes the meaning less clear. "Own" emphasizes that he wrote the lyrics.
You changed "broadcast reruns of season 12 in late night" to "broadcast reruns of season 12 in a late-night" which is incorrect grammar.

As you can see, most of your changes were not improvements. I hope you will be more careful with grammatical changes in the future. CodeTalker (talk) 15:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I apolgoize. At the time I had discovered this new software called "Grammarly" Me being 11 years old, I assumed grammar wasn't too complex and automatically assumed a virtual assistant such as Grammarly would be 100% accurate in fixing any mistakes made to the article. It was very delusional of me. but you have to remember that I didn't know any better. I wanted to abuse it on Hawaii Five-O's wikipedia article which was a show I had heard about from a Jimmy Kimmel Live! This episode had Jimmy Kimmel's cousin interviewing many people asking people what superheros they knew and one of the participants said "Hawaii Five-O". Me at the time believing it was absolutely hilarious, I thought this would be the perfect article to run the Grammarly on. I have learned and I now understand the frequent mistakes virtual assistants make because they are not always perfect. I apologize on behalf of my past childishness.

Sincerely,

Chumchumlol Chumchumlol (talk) 03:34, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Gender. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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 noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Beccaynr (talk) 05:56, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Gender. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Beccaynr (talk) 06:09, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia. Editors are expected to treat each other with respect and civility. On this encyclopedia project, editors assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Here is Wikipedia's welcome page, and it is hoped that you will assume the good faith of other editors and continue to help us improve Wikipedia! Please do not call good faith edits vandalism, as you did in your edit summary when you reverted an edit. You also say go to the talk page, but you have not gone to the talk page either. I will not be editing the page anymore, but you may be subject to an edit war block if you continue to revert when other people disagree with your edits and revert. Thank you. Yoshi24517 (mobile) (talk) (Very Busy) 04:01, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Ca ^{talk to me!} 08:12, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]