User talk:JoshRamirez29

Welcome! Hello, JoshRamirez29, 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:

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! --Paul Siebert (talk) 03:20, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Info box[edit]

Thanks for helping out but the for Info

adding in all the countries that had people who volunteered and or drafted may confuse the reader the info box is good it shows all the key players for the front

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Infobox#What_should_an_infobox_not_contain

Jack90s15 (talk) 05:33, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern front[edit]

for the info box its like a fact sheets, or sidebars, in magazine articles. They quickly summarize important points https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Infobox#What_should_an_infobox_not_contain

and adding ever thing like the Reichskommissariat and adding all the volunteers and conscripts is not needed info box its like a fact sheets, or sidebars, in magazine articles. They quickly summarize important points https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Infobox#What_should_an_infobox_not_contain Jack90s15 (talk) 06:42, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

that is why I undid it Info box its like a fact sheets, or sidebars, in magazine articles. They quickly summarize important points

for the Korean War info box it summarized the important points

the USSR and china sending Medical support Other support was a main part of the war Korean war

the volunteers and conscripts is part of the Eastern Front and WW2 but is not the main part of the Eastern Front

and that is why I Undid it Info box its like a fact sheets, or sidebars, in magazine articles. They quickly summarize important points

Good faith edit but not needed for that page Jack90s15 (talk) 06:56, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the Korean War One shows the other countries that sent supplies but for the Eastern Front it's best to keep it to the main players since it's very complicated and you don't want the reader confused by adding the Reichskommissariat all the volunteers and Concepts that were sent Jack90s15 (talk) 07:15, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019[edit]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 you 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. Nick-D (talk) 02:59, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Some of your recent genre changes, such as the one you made to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_production_during_World_War_II, have conflicted with our neutral point of view and verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend you seek consensus for certain edits by discussing the matter on the article's talk page. Please give sources for number change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research Jack90s15 (talk) 03:01, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for not providing proof when changing unit numbers.For example when I put mine removers i got those numbers from the totals of mine sweepers built during that era from Wikipedia articles on them.Is that not a good enough sources.If it is i can put that in the edits next time.JoshRamirez29 (talk) 03:19, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

sources need to come reliable, published sources

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable_sources

Jack90s15 (talk) 04:27, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

so it cant be the articles related to them?JoshRamirez29 (talk) 04:43, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

When copying content from one article to another, at a minimum provide a link back to the source page in the edit summary at the destination page and state that content was copied from that source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copying_within_Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copying_text_from_other_sources#How_about_copying_from_one_Wikipedia_article_to_another?

Jack90s15 (talk) 05:15, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ill make sure to do that.so do i just out the page as a source? JoshRamirez29 (talk) 05:23, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

like it says

When copying content from one article to another, at a minimum provide a link back to the source page in the edit summary at the destination page and state that content was copied from that source Read the links they have a lot of good info Jack90s15 (talk) 05:31, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Nick-D (talk) 02:11, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

JoshRamirez29 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I did not understand I was still in an edit war considering i did not undo any work three times as the rule suggests.I am fairly new and now understand not to edit war and to edit properly.I think this is a good reason to unblock me JoshRamirez29 (talk) 02:21, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline. User is no longer blocked. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:03, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

As noted by the templated warning above, there is no entitlement to three reverts. Your editing suggests an intention to escalate the edit war regardless of the warning and discussion above - you've gone from claiming that the USSR built three battlecruisers [1] to claiming that it built six [2] without providing any sources at all. Nick-D (talk) 02:25, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for that.I forgot to put that it included four Gangut-Class Battleships,one Parizhskaya Kommuna and one Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya.However i now see that they were part of the four battleship class meaining i should have put four instead of six JoshRamirez29 (talk) 02:32, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source for that? PhilKnight (talk) 20:27, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is one the same pages of the battleships.Simply look it up and it will show the count JoshRamirez29 (talk) 23:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure![edit]

Hi JoshRamirez29! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 06:01, Sunday, May 5, 2019 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Helping you out[edit]

it seems like you are in to the eastern front, and are trying to do good I would like to recommend some books to you to help in your Future endeavors in wiki and your own study that you could get at your local library or amazon

When Titans Clashed: How the Red Army Stopped Hitler by David M. Glantz and by David M. Glantz

The Russo-German War, 1941-45 from 1971 old but it was my first book about the eastern front, Titans Clashed I liked more with the info and all in it by Albert Seaton

German Soldier Vs Soviet Soldier: Stalingrad 1942–43 by Chris McNab

To the Gates of Stalingrad: Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942 The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume I they have 2 more Volumes by David Glantz Jonathan M. House

Jack90s15 (talk) 03:10, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the suggestions :) JoshRamirez29 (talk) 04:29, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

anytime !Jack90s15 (talk) 04:51, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Central intervention in the Russian Civil War moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Central intervention in the Russian Civil War, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 04:36, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your decision. Your right to do so considering it needs more sources JoshRamirez29 (talk) 02:04, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Heimosodat, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Petsamo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 06:46, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Central intervention in the Russian Civil War (July 2)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by WikiAviator was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Central intervention in the Russian Civil War and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Central intervention in the Russian Civil War, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

WikiAviator (talk) 07:35, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JoshRamirez29! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! WikiAviator (talk) 07:35, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Links to draft articles[edit]

Please do not link to draft articles, as you did at Russian Civil War, as this contravenes MOS:DRAFTNOLINK - Thank you - Arjayay (talk) 12:21, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 8[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Russian Civil War, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Don.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:24, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 16[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited World war, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Galicia.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:48, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:59, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Central intervention in the Russian Civil War[edit]

Hello, JoshRamirez29. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Central intervention in the Russian Civil War, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 09:01, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Projects[edit]

Are those election projects on your main page allowed?? Seems interesting Lostfan333 (talk) 21:29, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well they arent real and i dont claim they are or promote them around its just in my sandbox so its fine JoshRamirez29 (talk) 22:40, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Beautiful. Why haven't you filled out the states yet?? You have me interested Lostfan333 (talk) 00:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I cant edit them each photo is a premade one by a creator and I cant publish false photos on wikipedia to put them in and I dont even know how to make them JoshRamirez29 (talk) 01:55, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:50, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Emerging Republican Majority moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, The Emerging Republican Majority, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ~Styyx^Talk? 19:34, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well I would have hoped it could stand a little longer to add more from others and not just me but I guess I will have to follow your rules JoshRamirez29 (talk) 02:15, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Youngkin coalition, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Adakiko (talk) 05:50, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:The Emerging Republican Majority[edit]

Hello, JoshRamirez29. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:The Emerging Republican Majority, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:34, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:The Emerging Republican Majority[edit]

Hello, JoshRamirez29. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "The Emerging Republican Majority".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:31, 4 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) 01:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]