Hello, Gnomeplacelikewiki, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
- Introduction and Getting started
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article
- Simplified Manual of Style
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! –Ammarpad (talk) 14:56, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Legend of Lucy Keyes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mystery (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Frankenstein (1973 film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Robert Gentry
- Frankenstein (miniseries) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Mary Shelley's Frankenstein
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Alex is a known spammer who has been blocked multiple times for spamming his site. He changes references in articles to point towards his site. That is what happened here. He changed an existing source, which you then removed entirely. I then reverted it back to the original source. I've blocked Alex's account, it's just the latest in a series of self-promotion. -- ferret (talk) 14:45, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi, i don't want to vandalize. But, it never was confirmed as a official fourth single from dw, neither from her or her label. a media calling it 'next single' doesen't mean anything. The same media called 'Everyday' the fourth single. Can we eventually do something about it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 17:56, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
- @184.108.40.206: There is a discussion on the talk page about this issue and the consensus was that it is a single and not a promotional single. If you disagree, that talk page is the place to take it up. GnomeSweetGnome (talk) 18:38, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Lumbee shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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.
Note that I gave the other editor the same warning. Doug Weller talk 19:41, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Doug Weller: I just finished a WP:SOCK report (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Poprobeson) This person is a sock of an editor who has been blocked multiple times for this same behavior. GnomeSweetGnome (talk) 19:44, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks I think you’re right but I’m involved. Doug Weller talk 20:00, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
- Please stop the edit war in the article about Dreadlock holiday**
If you want "research" you can listen to the song text. In the past wikipedia was written mostly by IPs. Now a group of users like you and crap bots revert anything that is done by an IP. Actually you will be a part of a research article Im writnig - how everything is reverted on wikipedia if someone posts from an IP. If you are a decent human being, you should listen to the song and revert your deletionist revert. I dont think this will happen, people like you think they are always right though - I bet you reverted without listening to the actual song. Because someone using an IP "dared" to revert a bot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 13:15, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
- Listening to the song as evidence is original research. Information needs to be verifiable using reliable sources independent of the subject itself. Whether you are using an IP or a user account has no bearing on unreferenced original research being reverted. GnomeSweetGnome (talk) 13:21, 16 December 2017 (UTC)