User talk:Félix An

This is Félix An's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1: 90 days

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Your edit warring warning

You warned User:Hob Gadling against edit warring here, wrongly stating that they had "reverted to restore [their] preferred version of an article several times". What they had done was actually revert your own addition once, clearly stating their reason in the edit summary. Also, the wording of the "soft" warning template you used was only suitable for talking to a new user, not a highly experienced one as in this case ("The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware.." etc). Thirdly, if anybody would be expected to take the issue to talk ("All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus"), it would be you, not HG. (Compare WP:BRD.) Since you used this ill-fitting warning template so inappropriately, you'll probably be better off using your own words. Bishonen | tålk 11:57, 14 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

OK, I will not use that template again. But I have to say, Hob's answer was so harsh. I doubt I will sleep well tonight. I already have two classes and a project in university to worry about, and I don't want more stress. Félix An (talk) 12:26, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied at the Help Desk, since you wrote a similar post there. Bishonen | tålk 12:53, 14 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Contentious topics alert for all geneder related pages

You have recently made edits related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them. This is a standard message to inform you that gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Doug Weller talk 07:03, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, acknowledged, thank you. Félix An (talk) 07:28, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning. I have reverted you recent edits to the page Drag panic to an earlier stable version.

As you will be aware, this article has been nominated for a title change, deletion and merge previously, but the consensus was that the current title is the most accurate WP:COMMONNAME, and that its use is reflected in scholarly literature as well as the news. It is therefore WP:NPOV to refer to the standard common name, although if there is debate about the terminology among RS, this could go in a terminology/discussion section.

To avoid WP:UNDUE and WP:FALSEBALANCE, we should use RS.

I would like to invite you to use the WP:BRD process to discuss any outstanding issues on the talk page. There is a current discussion about bias and POV, so it may be helpful to add your proposed text there and then make these changes/edits only once a consensus has been reached. It may be that there is a compromise that can be reached in further distinguishing, for example, between drag panic as an idea and the protests that occur and which reference the tropes of drag panic.

Lewisguile (talk) 09:44, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024

Hello, I'm Amigao. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Security deposit, 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. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Amigao (talk) 14:36, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm a little busy at the moment. I'll dig for sources when I have time, because I'm confident I can find sources for what I said, since I experienced them all myself. Perhaps you could help me if you have some time. Thanks! Félix An (talk) 15:08, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Startup sound

Hello, Félix An. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Startup sound, 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) 07:07, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved content from Triumphal entry into Jerusalem into The Messiah's Donkey. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content (here or elsewhere), Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:12, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, sorry about that! I was about to do that, but I forgot to. I will do it now on the talk page. Félix An (talk) 02:21, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]