User talk:Kidgeorge

Welcome!

Hi Kidgeorge! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! RFD (talk) 17:41, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Kidgeorge! 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.

-- 23:54, Thursday, October 22, 2020 (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

February 2021

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page USS John F. Kennedy (CV-67) has been reverted.
Your edit here to USS John F. Kennedy (CV-67) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links in references which are discouraged per our reliable sources guideline. The reference(s) you added or changed (https://2012movie.fandom.com/wiki/USS_John_F._Kennedy) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 18:32, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinates

When you copy a {{coord}} template from elsewhere in an article to the infobox, please remember to change the |display=title parameter to |display=inline,title and to delete the original {{coord}} template. Deor (talk) 14:09, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brighton Street Scene moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Brighton Street Scene, 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. CommanderWaterford (talk) 16:03, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Brighton Street Scene for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brighton Street Scene is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brighton Street Scene until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

BOVINEBOY2008 22:21, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Page title disambiguation

Hey, welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for your contributions! Given that the two train collisions occurred in different years (indeed, different decades), the titles already distinguish them from each other quite adequately. If the two had happened in the same year, then there would definitely be a need for further disambiguation, such as by location within Maryland; as it is, readers are much less likely to be familiar with the location of "Silver Spring" than with the location of "Maryland", making the "Maryland" title the more helpful and informative option. In cases like these, if you feel that confusion is still likely, a good option is to use a so-called "hatnote" at the top of the article to suggest the other option to a reader. I've added suitable hatnotes to both articles now, just in case someone arrives at one article looking for the other. Hope this helps! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 13:44, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

English variants

Re: 2020 Beirut explosion

Hello. In a recent edit, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you.

Concern regarding Draft:Brighton Street Scene

Hello, Kidgeorge. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Brighton Street Scene, 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) 01:02, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Brighton Street Scene has been accepted

Brighton Street Scene, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Na-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

DGG ( talk ) 06:15, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Cambodian–Vietnamese War into Ba Chúc massacre. 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. DanCherek (talk) 02:34, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ba Chúc massacre

I appreciate your edits for the Ba Chúc massacre however the sections you added aren't sourced, so if you can add citations to them that would be great or I will be forced to remove them for lack of citations. Thanks.--Garmin21 (talk) 17:50, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I will try to add citations. I'm just busy at the moment doing my homework. I just can't good sources to add. I was thinking to get the sources from Cambodian–Vietnamese War. Could I have some help? Kidgeorge (talk) 23:50, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022

Hello. I wanted to let you know that your recent edit(s) to the 2012 (film) plot summary have been removed because they added a significant amount of unnecessary detail. Please avoid excessive detail and high word counts when editing plot summaries/synopses. You may read the plot summary edit guides to learn more about contributing constructively to plot summaries/synopses. There are also specific guidelines for films, musicals, television episodes, anime/manga, novels and non-fiction books. 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. DonIago (talk) 20:48, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Doniago! It's me, Kidgeorge. I saw your message. I know what you're saying but I edited the plot summary because it's leaving out a lot of details and important vocabulary and it feels too simplified. Respond back as soon as you can! Kidgeorge (talk) 21:10, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel the plot summary guidelines should be disregarded in favor of a summary that's over 1,000 words (i.e. over 300 words higher than the guideline), you'll need to raise the question at the article's Talk page to get a consensus that your version is preferable. I think editors tend to strongly favor WP:FILMPLOT, so you may have a rocky road in terms of convincing your fellow editors as to why your version is an improvement. Cheers! DonIago (talk) 21:13, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copy with Wikipedia

Thanks for identifying the source of the material in your edit.

This type of edit does get picked up by Copy Patrol and a good edit summary helps to make sure we don't accidentally revert it. However, for future use, would you note the best practices wording as outlined at Wikipedia:Copying_within_Wikipedia? In particular, adding the phrase "see that page's history for attribution" helps ensure that proper attribution is preserved.

I've noticed that this guideline is not very well known, even among editors with tens of thousands of edits, so it isn't surprising that I point this out to some veteran editors, but there are some t's that you need to be crossed.S Philbrick (Talk) 19:26, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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) 01:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fair Use

Hey there, hope you've been having a good day! I saw you uploading a new file in the Timelapse of the Future thumbnail page in a more hi-res version. WP:FAIRUSE says that any copyrighted images whenever possible needs to be reduced in size to indicate minimal usage. Thus we shouldn't upload the thumbnail in hi-res. I'll go on to re-size it again, but I just wanna put this out FYI so you'll understand the next time you see a low-res copyrighted image on WP. Cheers! Gerald WL 02:16, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for informing me! Kidgeorge (talk) 22:44, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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) 01:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:43, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2024

Hi Kidgeorge! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Jesus that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. Remsense ‥ 论 01:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. Does that mean that my edits are going to be reverted? Kidgeorge (talk) 01:50, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As you know, Jesus is a very important, high-attention article. You didn't see it, but there was a notice when editing the article above the lead section saying "The following paragraph was created by consensus after considerable discussion by a variety of editors. Out of courtesy for this process, please discuss any proposed changes on the talk page before editing it." I reverted the edit already, yes.

Moreover, I do not agree with the edit or think you adequately explained your reasoning either. That is to say, it is often ideal to broach questions on the talk page first, especially with an article like this one. Remsense ‥ 论 01:53, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay Kidgeorge (talk) 01:54, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]