User talk:Eyeluvbraixen

Hello, Eyeluvbraixen, and Welcome to Wikipedia!   

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Teahouse.

---

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

• Table of contents / Department directory

• The Wikipedia Adventure (a tutorial orienting you with Wikipedia)
• The Signpost, our newspaper

Need help?

• Questions – a guide on where to ask questions
• Cheatsheet – quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes
• Wikipedia's 5 pillars – an overview of Wikipedia's foundations

• Article wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
• The simplified ruleset – a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules
• Guide to Wikipedia – a thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia

How you can help:

• Contributing to Wikipedia – a guide on how you can help

• Community portal – Wikipedia's hub of activity

Additional tips...

• Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
• If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills without changing the mainspace, the Sandbox is for you.

Eyeluvbraixen, good luck, and have fun. scope_creep^Talk 06:40, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Question

Hi @Eyeluvbraixen I would like to ask why you removed so much content on Sugar Shack. Your edit has been reverted because you didn't explain why you removed so much content. Shadow345110 (talk) 21:32, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Eyeluvbraixen Ok thank you for adding an explanation on your edit summary I think a more experienced editor other than me would be better to sort this. Shadow345110 (talk) 21:55, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

That’s fine. Eyeluvbraixen (talk) 22:14, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Have fun editing on Wikipedia. Shadow345110 (talk) 22:41, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Ringo

Actually I was just about to revert myself for the very same reason. So no problem. However, again don't use words like "you're just power tripping" directed at an editor. You're getting close to personal attacks. This is not a warning, but if you continue to make such comments (to anyone, not just me), you may get a warning, and not necessarily from me. Sundayclose (talk) 19:16, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

August 2023

Hello, I'm Donald Albury. I noticed that you recently removed content from Vasco da Gama without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donald Albury 20:43, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Sorry. The thing was clearly broken, and since I have no idea how to fix it, I decided to remove it outright. Eyeluvbraixen (talk) 20:45, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

I don't know what you saw, but it works correctly in my browser in the version before you removed it, and it works correctly in the most recent version, when I reverted you without making any changes. What are you using (browser/device) to view/edit Wikipedia? Donald Albury 21:13, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

OK, now I’m wondering what happened on my end as well, because I swear that thing was broken when I removed it. But I’m looking at the previous edit before mine via Google Chrome and it looks normal. Maybe it didn’t load right for me, somehow? Eyeluvbraixen (talk) 21:43, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Funny things can happen. Reloading the screen or clearing the cache will often clear up display problems. Donald Albury 22:05, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Prehistoric art. 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.

Points to note:

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 and 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. Donald Albury 16:52, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Edit warring - Eastern Catholic Churches

Hi there - please revert your edit here. You made a bold edit; I reverted, and you restored it without discussion. That is edit warring. If you feel strongly about removing the template, you can raise it on the talk page. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:44, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

It’s a sidebar, dude. Eyeluvbraixen (talk) 01:52, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Whatever. I’ll comply. Eyeluvbraixen (talk) 01:55, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Deletions!!!1

Take your deletions to the TALK PAGES...Modernist (talk) 19:14, 24 August 2023 (UTC)