User talk:Howland666666
Introduction to contentious topics
[edit]
You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any page within this topic.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
M.Bitton (talk) 01:33, 2 May 2025 (UTC)
- I have simply noted the present Population of the rements of Jewish Communites in Arab lands Howland666666 (talk) 02:21, 2 May 2025 (UTC)
May 2025
[edit]
Thanks for contributing to the article Northamptonshire Yeomanry. However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. Please help by adding more sources to the article you edited, and/or by clarifying how the sources already given support the claims (see here for how to do inline referencing). If you need further help, you can look at Help:Menu/Editing Wikipedia, or ask at the Teahouse, or just ask me. Thank you. Dormskirk (talk) 09:02, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
Your edit to Jephthah has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. MCE89 (talk) 12:48, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. 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. GiantSnowman 15:17, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Tgeorgescu. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Esau, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Quora is not WP:RS. tgeorgescu (talk) 15:11, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Gehenna, you may be blocked from editing. RegentsPark (comment) 22:09, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
Recent edit reversion
[edit]In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.
I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.
I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. ~~~~ S Philbrick(Talk) 12:38, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Hi there! I see you copied chunks of text from Controversies surrounding Robert Falcon Scott to Terra Nova expedition and Cecil Meares without providing proper attribution. Copying from one article to another within Wikipedia requires attribution - that is, at a bare minimum, you need to announce that the content was copied in an edit summary, along with a link to the original source. Please be very careful - Wikipedia takes copyright very (very) seriously, and repeatedly disregarding the various copyright policies can lead to your account being blocked. I'm going to be adding null edits to both pages with proper attribution, so please just take care going forward. NekoKatsun (nyaa) 19:37, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
June 2025
[edit]
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Duck Hill, Mississippi. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:37, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Filioque while logged out. Please be mindful not to perform controversial edits while logged out, or your account risks being blocked from editing. Please consider reading up on Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts before editing further. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. Pbritti (talk) 16:57, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
Your edit to History of the filioque controversy has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 10:28, 8 June 2025 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Royal Northumberland Fusiliers. Dormskirk (talk) 22:23, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Grover Cleveland Bergdoll. You have added the following text without citing any source "The four surviving conspirators were seized and sentenced to prison terms. Griffis was widely considered a hero in the United States, and was also released early after a petition effort to free him collected more than two million signatures" MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:39, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for contributing to the article Jack Dragna. However, please do not use unreliable sources such as blogs, wikis, personal websites, and websites and publications with a poor reputation for checking the facts or with no editorial oversight. These sources may express views that are widely acknowledged as pushing a particular point-of-view, sometimes even extremist, being promotional in nature, or relying heavily on rumors and personal opinions. One of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. If you require further assistance, please look at Help:Menu/Editing Wikipedia, or ask at the Teahouse. Please see WP:RSREDDIT. Orxenhorf (talk) 03:04, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I notice that in none of your edits have you made use of an edit summary. Collaboration among editors is fundamental to Wikipedia, and every edit should be explained by a clear edit summary, or by discussion on the Talk page. Please use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to describe what it changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.
The edit summary field looks like this:
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
or in the visual editor:
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. When logged in to your Wikipedia account, you can give yourself a reminder by setting Preferences → Editing → 
Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary), and then click the "Save" button.
Thanks! MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:45, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Please read the sections of the Wikipedia policies that have been linked above. Your recent edits to Francisco Vázquez de Coronado have been reverted. The medallion image was specifically removed from the page in February 2024 because it is not Francisco shown. And the text addition was, in part, copied from Sobaipuri with the remainder being WP:Unsourced. I do, however, suspect it might have been copied from somewhere else I did not find. The portion copied from the Sobaipuri article contains spaces between sentences and the remainder does, but in a fashion similar to several of your other recent edits, there is no space between those two portions. Orxenhorf (talk) 18:03, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Julius Meimberg and All American (aircraft). That two bombers happened to be in combat with the enemy on the same day of World War II doesn't mean that they were together when they had their encounters. Even if they are part of the same group, they may have been attacked several different times on their mission. Also, nothing in the source you linked mentions the involvement of Julius Meimberg with the collision that Flaming Mayme suffered. Orxenhorf (talk) 00:02, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Please don't copy material from elsewhere
[edit]
Hello. I am Diannaa and I am a Wikipedia administrator. Prose you find online, in books, in magazines, and in newspapers is almost always copyright, and cannot be copied here; it's against the copyright policy of this website to do so. All prose must be written in your own words. The Wikipedia copyright policy and its application are complex matters, and you should not edit any more until you have taken the time to read and understand our copyright policy. There's a simplified version of our copyright rules at Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright. Further copyright issues will result in you being blocked from editing. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:12, 14 June 2025 (UTC)
I've reverted your edits Special:Diff/1295749801/1296131117 as I don't think there's a good reason to add inline death dates following the names of many of the people involved. You also added a sentence with three typographical errors: "offa enforecer [[Frank Sheeran]] claimed to have been involved in Hoffa death." MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:41, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Today, you have in these edits Special:Diff/1296142014/1296184690 added several sentences to Jack Dragna listing as your source "Server, Lee (2018). Handsome Johnny: The Life and Death of Johnny Roselli". This is a 544 page book, and citing it without any indication whatsoever of the page(s) on which the information may be found does not allow readers to verify the information. As Wikipedia:Verifiability says, "The cited source must clearly support the material as presented in the article. Cite the source clearly, ideally giving page number(s)—though sometimes a section, chapter, or other division may be appropriate instead". I have reverted your edits for now. MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:34, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Administrators' noticeboard report
[edit]
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.
This edit that you made today to Francisco Vázquez de Coronado once again adds unsourced material, and has correctly been reverted by Orxenhorf as noted above. As you have not responded to anything here, have ignored all suggestions and warnings, and are carrying on regardless, I have reported you for administrator action. MichaelMaggs (talk) 21:28, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
June 2025
[edit]You have persistently added unsourced and poorly sourced content. You have repeatedly added copyright protected content. You have not heeded warnings. Accordingly, you have been indefinitely blocked from editing article space. You are free to make well-referenced, copyright compliant edit requests on article talk pages. Please read the Guide to appealing blocks. Cullen328 (talk) 03:13, 19 June 2025 (UTC)