User talk:Firefly115/Archive 1

September 2022[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Please review WP:OVERLINKING - FlightTime (open channel) 01:19, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at Pordoselene, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. - FlightTime (open channel) 01:23, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make disruptive edits to Wikipedia contrary to the Manual of Style. wp:overlinking - FlightTime (open channel) 01:26, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, I thought I was helping. I'll find something else to do. Firefly115 (talk) 22:54, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Battle of Pochonbo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Japanese. 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) 09:03, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Hi Firefly115! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Tristario (talk) 23:48, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022[edit]

Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Brittany Underwood, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. The category being added must already exist, and must be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. Thank you. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:11, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Thank you for the feedback. Which category are you talking about though?

Firefly115 (talk) 12:36, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First, you need to understand WP:NOTDEFINING and WP:CATVER. Second, do not add categories, especially to WP:BLPs, that actually entirely inaccurate – e.g. Category:Colombian actors or "Colombian" anything: this subject was born in the U.S. and there is no evidence that she is even a Colombian citizen, let along having done any significant work in Colombia. Additionally, you added categories that were either incorrect, or were WP:SUPERCATs of categories already used at Brittany Underwood. In general, editors should stay away from doing categories editing unless they really understand how they are supposed to work. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:20, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've adjusted my strategy, hopefully it's improved. Firefly115 (talk) 12:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Two concerns[edit]

At Stanton, Alabama, you added three categories identifying Stanton as a "ghost town", yet there is nothing in the article suggesting this place is uninhabited. In fact, there is a link in the article to this source where Stanton is identified as a "populated place". Four days ago, at Fort Morgan, Alabama, I reverted this edit with the edit summary, "Please provide a source to support that this is a ghost town". Please note that WP:CATV states: "Categorization of articles must be verifiable. It should be clear from verifiable information in the article why it was placed in each of its categories". Could you please explain these unsupported category additions?

Also, you have been going from article to article adding three levels of categorization. For example, at Snettisham, Juneau, you added w:Category:Ghost towns in Alaska, w:Category:Ghost towns in the United States, and w:Category:Ghost towns in North America. Please note that WP:CATSPECIFIC states: "an article should be categorised under the most specific branch in the category tree possible, without duplication in parent categories above it". Could you please explain all these unnecessary category additions? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:20, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thank you for your feedback, I'm still honing this skill. As far as Stanton as being a ghost town, that is easy, it is listed as a ghost town on the list of Ghost Towns in Alabama that you can see here- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ghost_towns_in_Alabama

Next, I was unaware of the most specific branch in the category tree rule and will move forward with that understanding.

My goal is to improve the platform and I was told that Cats would be a good way of doing that, is there any topic that is lacking in Cats that I can work on? Or better yet, do you have any work that you can assign to me to help improve Wikipedia? Thank you. Firefly115 (talk) 13:29, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

Hi, you have incorrectly added many living biographies to the veganism category. I understand you may be new to this but you need to read up on the category policies for living persons. Firstly that veganism category is not for living biographies, secondly you are adding biography articles to the veganism category, but the biographies themselves you have added have no mention of veganism on the article, so this is a BLP violation because it is original research. For example on the Axel (singer) article you added the "veganism" category but this has no sources on the article indicating he is a vegan, even if he was, this not a defining factor of the mans life so we wouldn't add a vegan category. We have categories for veganism activists, but this must be added only if veganism is a defining factor of the persons life. A lot of singers you have added to the veganism category would not qualify for this. Psychologist Guy (talk) 19:21, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I also have noticed this problem. It applies as well to categories about animal rights activism. Such categories should only be applied when they are WP:DEFINING, not when it is simply a minor aspect of someone who is notable for completely unrelated things. Please note also that we have categories for animal welfare and animal rights scholars, so activism is only the case when the person has actually practiced activism. Also, some of these categories have subcategories by nation, so it is overcategorization to put someone in the parent category when they are already in a subcategory of it. Overall, please take it easy with adding categories, and make sure that they are really appropriate before adding them. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:50, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit reversion[edit]

In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick (Talk) 14:44, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, could you copy and paste my original text in here so that I can revise it to fix any issues? I am not able to access my prior entry. Thank you. Firefly115 (talk) 14:47, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sphilbrick Firefly115 (talk) 14:02, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to post it here is that would be a copyright violation. I can email it to you. I see that your email option is not turned on. If you turn on your email option I will send you the text of your edit. S Philbrick (Talk) 14:09, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Sphilbrick, Thank you. I just added an email. Looking forward to making the revisions!

Firefly115 (talk) 13:56, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sent S Philbrick (Talk) 19:33, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :) Firefly115 (talk) 17:23, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]

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) 01:56, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alert[edit]

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 governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues. 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.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.

O3000, Ret. (talk) 01:35, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is just a standard warning to be careful about some articles. Not a suggestion that you did anything wrong. O3000, Ret. (talk) 01:36, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, is there any feedback that can be provided about my contributions? Like did I do anything wrong or right?

Firefly115 (talk) 22:08, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why the passive aggressive message?[edit]

My addition didn't pass your approval, so you reverted my change. I see no point in sending me passive aggressive messages suggesting me to use the sandbox. 79.166.4.69 (talk) 16:23, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You engaged in vandalism on the Jeffrey Sachs page, I was providing you with your first warning not to continue doing that to provide you with the benefit of the doubt. I apologize that you took it as a passive aggressive message but this is the standard response to vandalism on Wikipedia. Firefly115 (talk) 16:25, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]