User talk:Redngoldtilimdeadncold

Welcome

Hello Redngoldtilimdeadncold and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your contributions, such as the ones to J. D. Sumner, do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox (but beware that the contents of the sandbox are deleted frequently) rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Drmies (talk) 02:31, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to Hoag, Nebraska does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Elizium23 (talk) 05:31, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to A.C.A.B. has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: A.C.A.B. was changed by Redngoldtilimdeadncold (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.86554 on 2020-07-25T16:47:41+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 16:47, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removing symbols

In two recent edits you made (Special:Diff/968613614 and Special:Diff/969471524) you removed a large number of symbols from the article. These are not "unecessary extra symbols", as you can see by looking at the article outside of the editor. These are part of Wikitext, which allows Wikipedia articles to have nice formatting and generally be more useful. To take the second edit as an example: the {{short description}} line controls what shows up under the title when searching on mobile devices, the {{Redirect}} line displays the note about the redirect at the top of the page, {{Use dmy dates}} is a signal to bots to use dd/mm/yyyy style dates, and the brackets allow linking to other pages or including images. Without the curly braces or brackets, the software can't determine what these things mean, and so just outputs them as text.

Please don't remove these in the future. If you don't understand why symbols are there, leave them alone. If you need to change them to edit, check in preview mode before saving your edit and see if you can notice what changed; if you still can't figure out what they do, you can ask at the Wikipedia:Help desk.

Thanks, Vahurzpu (talk) 21:17, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to Castration, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use your sandbox. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 02:50, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Blood. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. General Ization ^Talk 03:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Account being used for continuous vandalism (link removal). February 2021

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Sexual intercourse, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Babegriev (talk) 02:57, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm CLCStudent. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. CLCStudent (talk) 17:27, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Tjsynkral (talk) 06:55, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Bra ‎. Stop doing this. Do not arbitrarily remove links, and do not change the bolding of the article title term to quotes. And do not change the spelling of the titles or references as you did in Comb. The book title used "... An Historical ...". It does not matter if you prefer to use "...A Historical ..." That was the name the book was published under.

Level four since you have continued to do these sorts of edits after your level 3 warning. Meters (talk) 03:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And please read WP:MINOR. These are not minor edits. Meters (talk) 03:53, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 2021

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Tri-City Storm.

As with everyone else has stated above. There will be no more final warnings for arbitrarily removing valid links from articles such as this. Yosemiter (talk) 19:17, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

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 ~~~~}}. Daniel Case (talk) 04:51, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Orange Mike | Talk 18:31, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. —Bagumba (talk) 06:32, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Please explain how the edits I have made are disruptive. I'm not going in and removing entire paragraphs. Taking out unnecessary punctuation and/or wording that avoids repetition, because repeating things isn't good, makes things easier reading. All the extra [[]] (()) around things, makes it harder to read/is not vandalism. A legit reference was added to an article last night, where needed.

"These are not "unecessary extra symbols," (isn't true, my words) as you can see by looking at the article outside of the editor. These are part of Wikitext, which allows Wikipedia articles to have nice formatting and generally be more useful.

Nice formatting means having fewer symbols, which is more helpful/easier to read.

No links have been arbitrarily removed by me, as was claimed I did.

The first time or two of editing something on a page, I didn't know that an edit summary was needed. I've summarized what ever-so-minor non-disruptive edits edits were made, since then.

"...A Historical ..." is grammatically correct, regardless of what article title someone chooses.

That I'm aware of, have never even edited any part of a reference. Those are purposely left alone, as is.

Disruptive: causing, tending to cause or caused by disruption; disrupting:

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/disruptive

Vandalism would mean going into an article and editing or completely removing part/all of it. Up until now, since my 2nd or 3rd edit, I've included a note of what was done, with no one having a problem, prior to you complaining.

I don't deserve to be blocked indefinitely for making minor edits/explanation provided.

Sincerely,

redngoldtilimdeadncold Redngoldtilimdeadncold (talk) 12:41, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]