Jump to content

User talk:Guto2003

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Iryna Harpy (talk | contribs) at 00:57, 3 January 2020 (Caution: Not adhering to neutral point of view on Kuban Cossacks. (TW)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hello, Guto2003, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement.

Happy editing! The Ogre (talk) 16:08, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Finding your way around
Editing articles
Getting help
How you can help

June 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Wikipedia. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Please do not remove dates and years from articles. --aktsu (t / c) 15:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting it into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other articles that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. --aktsu (t / c) 04:31, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Again, pleast stop removing years and dates from articles. --aktsu (t / c) 08:47, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Admin noticeboard

You've been mentioned in a thread at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Guto2003; feel free to comment there. In addition, please read and respond to messages left on your talk page. If you've offered any justification for your removal of dates on citations, I don't see it. You've been repeatedly asked for a justification with no apparent response. If you need help using a talk page, please see Wikipedia:Talk page. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:31, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Guto2003. You have been the subject of a Aministrative incident report as the result of what appear to a vandalising edits on Wikipedia. In future if you have reasons to remove dates or references from articles, please provide explanations in the article discussion pages. However if you persist in making edits that appear to be vandalism, and/or failing to provide adequate reasons for your edits, you will be immediately blocked from further editing. Manning (talk) 03:36, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This seems unnecessarily harsh, to me... have you even considered the possibility this user might be acting in good faith? There's nothing so urgent about this that we need to break out that sort of threat at the get-go. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:30, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2010

Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Christopher Hitchens, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. Categories must also be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. Thank you. RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 18:54, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Iranian anti-communists

Please do not add the above category to articles about Iranian politicians, unless there is verifiable information present in those articles that anti-communism was/is an important part of that person's political stance. The articles where you added this category, such as Saeed Jalili, Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Parviz Davoodi, etc, do not mention anti-communism at all. Nsk92 (talk) 18:00, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stop re-adding this category and please re-read WP:CONSENSUS. Once your edits have been objected to (as they have been, by me), you may not re-add the categories in question unless and until consensus to add them has been established. If you continue violating WP:CONSENSUS, you may be blocked from editing. Nsk92 (talk) 18:32, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

November 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Nelson Mandela has been reverted, as it introduced negative or controversial biographical material without providing a reliable source for this information. Wikipedia requires that all such material be sourced to address the issue of libel. Thank you. Logan (talk) 21:59, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted it again, on the grounds that it is unsupported by the article text, so should not be in the article lead, and is also unsupported by mainstream references. Zaian (talk) 20:33, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

may 2011

Please stop adding unreferenced controversial biographical content to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Brotha Lynch Hung. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Please stop adding categories about medical conditions without providing a reliable source. Active Banana (bananaphone 02:33, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please show the sources said that Ho Chi Minh is an Anti-Revisionist.--Tranletuhan (talk) 07:23, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Consistent use of inappropriate language

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

December 2012

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for making personal attacks against another editor. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  (✉→BWilkins←✎) 23:40, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Billy Graham

Do you really think that the edit summary you used here is appropriate for a major religious leader's page? Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:34, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your word choice in edit-summaries is at times juvenile. Grow up. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 06:43, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The word choice employed by some Wikipedians (i.e. "dictator", "genocidal", "child eater", etc.) is "juvenile", not mine. Wikipedian opportunism and double standards is juvenile. ~~Talk to me

Incorrect; a dictator is a dictator. Genocidal has a meaning that can be verified. I have, however, never seen a person whose physique is the equal of an asshole. Arguably, motherfucker can be sourced, but you better provide a good source per BLP; but inanimate objects do not have mothers and therefore cannot fuck them. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 00:27, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There are MANY words that can replace "dictator" in order to avoid personal points of view, such as "leader", for example.
And there are many ways of disagreeing w/o calling people motherfuckers or assholes. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 05:40, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're spending too much time on me, me dear mate. Don't you have a wife?

~~ ;D

Per Help:Edit summary: Avoid inappropriate summaries. Editors should explain their edits, but not be overly critical or harsh when editing or reverting others' work. This may be perceived as uncivil, and cause tension or bad feelings, which makes collaboration more difficult. Explain what you changed, and cite the relevant policies, guidelines or principles of good writing, but try not to target or to single out others in a way that may come across as an attack or an insult.--Amadscientist (talk) 09:09, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. See Billy Graham comment on the page Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:02, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was a little surprised

at all your Citation Needed tag at Emma Goldman as her disillusionment with Soviet Russia is well known. It's sort of like demanding more proof that cigarette smoking is bad for your health. Oh well. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 22:33, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The tag was about the allegation of "repression, mismanagement, and corruption", which can clearly be defined as an expression of the personal point of view of the asshole who has written such a sentence. Every affirmation demands a reference.  ;) ~~Товарищ Гуто... Поговори со мной

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Miroslav (given name) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • '''Miroslav''' ([[Ukrainian language|Ukrainian]], [[Belarusian language|Belarrussian]] and [[Russian language|

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:27, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Soviet working class

I've reverted you're edits, but maid it more clear the referencing.. (everything is referenced, I wrote the article, and nothing seems to have changed much since).. Don't worry, everything is referenced.. Secondly, while I see you're a communist, a good idea would not to identify yourself with the Soviet Union, it was a disaster. There is hope in Cuba tough, the socialist market economy will hopefully flourish there and the political system will be liberalized and further democratized :) ... Anyway, if anything else is left unclear just give a note on my talk page. --TIAYN (talk) 19:41, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes to communism, "neutrality" don't mean shit to most "Wikipedians", ain't it, TIAYN? As they say, talk is cheap, but only in Wikipedia, bullshit talking is free. Wikipedia, a hotbed for assholes and shit talkers. Guto2003 (talk) 10:51, 24 October 2018 (UTC)I'm Guto and your opinion doesn't mean shit to me. You talking outta your ass.[reply]

By the way, I'm sorry for the late response. Your comment may have gone unnoticed, since I have some better things to do than to be engaging in discussionsin a content-free, unthrustworthy "encyclopedia". Guto2003 (talk) 10:58, 24 October 2018 (UTC)You know me and your opinion still doesn't mean shit to me anyway.[reply]

"Fascists"

I have completely reverted your edits because they were in violation of Wikipedia's NPOV policy which states that articles must adhere to a neutral point of view at all times. Including categories labeling articles as fascist is neither neutral nor constructive. I suggest you find a more constructive habit on Wikipedia and contribute to enhancing and improving our articles rather than fueling the flames. Regards, § DDima 04:03, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah? Fuck you. There are fascists all over that Euromaidan movement. Just check the ideology that guides most political parties involved in it, you fuck. ~~ User:Guto2003

July 2014

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Edits like this are completely unacceptable. I will block you if such attack repeats. Alex Bakharev (talk) 23:04, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

8=====D (_(_|J

Товарищ Гуша

August 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Polish People's Republic may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • in East Germany at the time{{citation needed|Date=August 2014}}{{dubious}|Date=August 2014}}. These trends led to an unhealthy state of affairs where the chief determinant of economic status

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:06, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2015

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Suharto. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. for edit warring WP:3RR noting the that the category you want to add is unsupported by the article content take it to the talk page to resolve Gnangarra 07:37, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 2011 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • internationalism|noted for his work]] on francophone [[Africa]] and the [[Soviet Union]] (b. [[1946]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:49, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Okay, no worries.

Speedy deletion nomination of Hitlery Clinton

Please do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. DivaNtrainin (talk) 01:44, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blah, blah, blah... Guto2003 (Come and get some!)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Eddie Rosner, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MGB. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Guto2003

I was so impressed with your performance that I opened an ANI topic about you. Please reply there.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:02, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sooo damn flattered... Thanks! Guto2003 Talk ya a** off

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Guto2003. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2017

Information icon Hello, I'm Yamaguchi先生. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Lil' Keke, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 23:18, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Andrew Jackson & Martin Van Buren

You wrote "There were NOTHING "incidental" about Indian casualties in the removals. They were criminal acts of genocide and ethnic cleansing. I see a highly pro-American bias in your argumentation."

I confess to a pro-English language bias. With that in mind, I find that according to the definition of genocide, you are applying it as a contentious label.

The biological warfare involving smallpox was genocidal. The Indian Removal Act & Trail of Tears, while being acts of collective punishment, discrimination, ethnic cleansing, ethnic conflict, forced migration, human rights abuses, persecution, racism, & violence, were not genocidal as these were not an effort to extinguish those tribes. You therefore cannot call it a genocide under WP:NPOV. Others will continually revert it.

If you have a different opinion, take it to the Talk:Andrew Jackson & Talk:Martin Van Buren pages before again attempting these edits.

Peaceray (talk) 17:23, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

Information icon Hello, I'm Peaceray. 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 Martin Van Buren 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. "Genocide is intentional action to destroy a people"; here the intent was to forcibly remove them to another location. Your categorization of Martin Van Buren as Category:Genocide perpetrators is a contentious label. Peaceray (talk) 04:02, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Andrew Jackson. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. "Genocide is intentional action to destroy a people"; here the intent was to forcibly remove them to another location. Your categorization of Andrew Jackson as Category:Genocide perpetrators is a contentious label. Peaceray (talk) 04:06, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. DMacks (talk) 16:50, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Guto2003. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018

Information icon Hello, I'm Iryna Harpy. 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 Kuban Cossacks 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. Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:41, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hmf... yeah, whatever... --> Guto (Talking that smack will get you smacked)

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Kuban Cossacks. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Iryna Harpy (talk) 19:20, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

--> Guto (Talk your ass off...)

February 2018

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Kuban Cossacks 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. Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:57, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Iryna, you seem to have a proclinity in making your opinion prevalent over the policy concerning bias, don't you? As an adult, litterate (I assume so) person, you should be aware that, while the term "policies" doesn't carry any point of view at all, leaving the question at the reader's interpretation, the term "horrors" carry a strong bias in the question of point of view, which I don't think is Wikipedia's purpose at all. Should I be blocked for "edit warring"? Fine. Block me! I think you should be blocked for blatant PROPAGANDA and violation of Wikipedia's neutral standards! User:Guto2003 Talk ya ass off...

Hello, Guto2003. I've responded further on the thread we've been communicating on on the relevant talk page (also moving it to the bottom of the page per WP:BOTTOMPOST so that other editors are aware of its being a recent 'dispute', and giving them an opportunity to comment on the issue). I have no qualms about continuing the discussion, but could you please try to keep it respectful and give up the condescending tone. I don't believe you to be a fool, nor do I believe that your complaints should be entirely dismissed. I have noted that I am not the one responsible for the description in the content, but am acting in the capacity of a 'janitor' of sorts on the hundreds of articles on my watchlist. I am not trying to threaten or intimidate you, and apologise if it has come across as being my intention, but would ask that you follow WP:BRD and try to keep the discussion focussed on the article's talk page where it is far more likely to initiate a genuine dialogue between editors as to the presentation of content. I would also ask that you read WP:SHOUT before you continue such a discourse. It doesn't sit well with the community when editors end up turning potentially valid observations into WP:BATTLEGROUND soap operas. Thanks! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:53, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion for Guards Tape

An article that you have been involved in editing—Guards Tape—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. TheImperios (talk) 19:37, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Caution: Unconstructive editing on Jair Bolsonaro

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Jair Bolsonaro. Your edits appear to be disruptive and were in violation of Wikipedia's NPOV policy which states that articles must adhere to a neutral point of view at all times, including categories labeling articles as fascist is neither neutral nor constructive. I suggest you find a more constructive habit on Wikipedia and contribute to enhancing and improving our articles rather than fueling the flames.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. BDMKK (talk) 01:48, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Guto2003. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Flag of Malaysia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Malaya (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) 09:39, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019

Information icon Hello, I'm SummerPhDv2.0. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Bloods, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. SummerPhDv2.0 04:00, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

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) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2019

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at Florencia 13, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. SummerPhDv2.0 12:36, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020

Information icon Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Kuban Cossacks. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. The source used does not say that. If you think your perspective is relevant, find a reliable source to back it up. I strongly suggest you read the reliable source policy first, because you are not going to find one that passes as reliable. Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:57, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Guto2003&oldid=933784684"