Taksen

Edit War

Hi Taksen! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Germaine de Staël 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:Germaine de Staël, 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. Let us try to reach a consensus like adults.

Let us try to reach a consensus mate. Sangsangaplaz (talk) 13:28, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

December 2023

Hello. This is a message to let you know that a page you recently edited is being discussed on its talk page Talk:Germaine de Staël#Revert. You may wish to participate in the discussion. Masato.harada (talk) 08:19, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

The article is not on my watchlist anymore. I am not so interested in participating. For many years I did what I could to improve the article. Regards.Taksen (talk) 09:01, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Taksen. Thank you for your work on Accusateur public. North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:36, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Death and euphemisms

Hi Taksen, you introduced a euphemism for death into the article on the Chevalier de Saint-Georges. According to the Manual of Style this is explicitly to be avoided. ("The goal is to express ideas clearly and directly"). Scarabocchio (talk) 01:06, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

February 2024

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Execution of Louis XVI into another page. 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. From Maximilien Robespierre —Matrix(!) (a good person!)_{[Citation not needed at all; thank you very much]} 17:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

I moved text from the article on Robespierre which I added there through the years. Now someone is deleting a lot of (referenced) information. I try to safe all these precious details, but did not know I have to use this template. It looks complicated to me. Taksen (talk) 21:57, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

March 2024

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:26, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

ANI report

A report was filed on Wikipedia:Administrators noticeboard/Incidents concerning you. Best regards, Encyclopédisme (talk) 07:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC).

Why is it dated 4 April? Taksen (talk) 06:18, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Oh, I’m sorry, It’s my second time going to ANI, I copied the message I sent on 4 April… PS: There, it’s fixed now. Encyclopédisme (talk) 07:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

In the ANI thread, it is now proposed that you be banned from editing mainspace. If you have an opinion on that, you can respond. EdJohnston (talk) 17:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

May 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain namespaces ((Article)) for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Valereee (talk) 19:39, 6 May 2024 (UTC)