Birdsflyinghigh123
Welcome!
edit
|
December 2020
editWelcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page The Divine Madness has been reverted.
Your edit here to The Divine Madness 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://www.discogs.com/artist/1088091-The-Divine-Madness) 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) 07:29, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Frank Mortenson tagged for deletion
editHello Birdsflyinghigh123, I wanted to let you know that I've tagged Frank Mortenson for deletion because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia. If you feel that this assessment is incorrect you can either edit the article to explain better how the subject is notable or you can click on the "Contest this deletion" button and explain it on the talk page, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. – Thjarkur (talk) 19:51, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia's notability guidelines, we can include subjects if they have received significant coverage from independent sources (for example, being covered often by independent newspaper reporters). Wikipedia also recommends against writing about people one knows personally. – Thjarkur (talk) 19:55, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you very much for your note. I will contest it. I don't know Frank Mortenson personally and also I intend to improve this article. Birdsflyinghigh123 (talk) 21:19, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Edwin Symonowicz
editPlease don't add hoaxes to Wikipedia. All material should reflect reliable independent sources. – Thjarkur (talk) 21:54, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
- Would you please mind stopping adding your non-notable friends to Wikipedia? Your edits are disruptive. – Thjarkur (talk) 08:01, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
- WP:GNG: "Sources" should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected. Sources do not have to be available online or written in English. 978-83-63245-70-2: "Another one geographer from Pomeranian voivodeship is Edwin Symonowicz, a man born in Dolina Jadwigi - small village in Gmina Sierakowice, Pomeranian Voivodeship. Despite his rural origin, he managed to come to Warsaw in 2009 and become a partner of our French colleagues in Poland." If you believe you obey the principles of Wikipedia, you would already notice that everything is alright in this situation and Symonowicz is covered by the sources which are enough to cite anyone on Wikipedia. I obey the principles of Wikipedia, and my edits are not disruptive - your reverting is based on your opinion and you even don't want to read the sources, no matter that the last one is ultrareliable and even cited on Washington Library page. I won't stop adding, because I'm not damaging principles of Wikipedia and adding real information covered in reliable secondary sources. I repeat once more: "Sources do not have to be available online or written in English". I obey these principles and every my edition is based on them. --84.55.19.40 (talk) 10:05, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
- In this or that way, all we are not notable. For example, how is Donald Trump notable for inhabitants of Kiribati? But he is a man who received big coverage by independent sources, both online and offline. The same thing is about Edwin Symonowicz - he received his coverage in reliable independent sources, and the last book provided by me is the best of all sources. He may be not notable for you, for your country,but your opinion remains an opinion, and coverage in independent sources remains the fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.55.19.40 (talk) 10:18, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
- WP:GNG: "Sources" should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected. Sources do not have to be available online or written in English. 978-83-63245-70-2: "Another one geographer from Pomeranian voivodeship is Edwin Symonowicz, a man born in Dolina Jadwigi - small village in Gmina Sierakowice, Pomeranian Voivodeship. Despite his rural origin, he managed to come to Warsaw in 2009 and become a partner of our French colleagues in Poland." If you believe you obey the principles of Wikipedia, you would already notice that everything is alright in this situation and Symonowicz is covered by the sources which are enough to cite anyone on Wikipedia. I obey the principles of Wikipedia, and my edits are not disruptive - your reverting is based on your opinion and you even don't want to read the sources, no matter that the last one is ultrareliable and even cited on Washington Library page. I won't stop adding, because I'm not damaging principles of Wikipedia and adding real information covered in reliable secondary sources. I repeat once more: "Sources do not have to be available online or written in English". I obey these principles and every my edition is based on them. --84.55.19.40 (talk) 10:05, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' noticeboard
editPlease see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User determined to add their non-notable friends to articles – Thjarkur (talk) 12:42, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
April 2021
edit
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.