User talk:TheWikipedian05

Hello, {{BASEPAGENAME}}, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on {{#if:|my talk page|my talk page}}, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!--MollyPollyRolly (talk) 02:08, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who have received a Teahouse invitation

File:Information.svg Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to :Alec Baldwin, did not appear to be constructive and have 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. — Chevvin 03:40, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Image:Information.svg Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from :2014 Isla Vista killings into :Draft:Elliot Rodger. 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 {{tl|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) 12:53, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Don't add unsourced material to the article. If you want to expand it, do it in a sandbox, then you can move the material later when it's sourced. Black Kite (talk) 00:13, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

: FYI, this article is being discussed here: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Massive (vile) quote. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 01:17, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

:: OK, but since consensus was required to make the article, consensus should be required to delete the article, and should be based solely on the merits (or lackthereof) of having an article. That this article is recently new doesn't imply it's wrong. TheWikipedian05 (talk) 1:24, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

::Hello, TheWikipedian05,

::Since you do care about this article, it would benefit you to participate in this noticeboard discussion which is questioning whether this page should be an article. I'm sure you have an opinion about this and it's better to be part of the discussion than to be surprised by the outcome of a discussion you've chosen not to enter. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:25, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

File:Information.svg Hi TheWikipedian05! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of :Elliot Rodger several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Elliot Rodger, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:22, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

:Is it really edit warring to restore the original version of the article, as it was? Currently, the article is gone, and I don't think restoring it would qualify as edit warring. TheWikipedian05 (talk) 1:42, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

TheWikipedian05 (talk) 1:24, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

{{unblock reviewed|I was not engaging in any kind of edit warring, as opposed to merely restoring the page to how it originally was. This page had all of its content deleted, all 40,000 KG worth of data, arbitrarily, without any kind of discussion or attempt to reach consensus. Such a thing is obviously unfair, considering I put in a lot of time to make this article. I was simply restoring this page to its original version and, when it became clear that edits were constantly made, actually started a discussion to help achieve consensus. The onus of proof is on the people who want to make the relevant changes, not the person who wants to keep the status quo. TheWikipedian05 (talk) 4:26, 5 March 2022 (UTC)|decline=The content was not removed arbitrarily, but based on Wikipedia policy as described in the edit history. Your defense seems to boil down to that you think you were correct; being correct is not a defense, as everyone in an edit war thinks that they are correct. The onus is on you, as someone who supports changing a redirect into an article, to demonstrate why it is needed and how policy supports you. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 10:18, 5 March 2022 (UTC)}}