User talk:JIlQIM

Disambiguation link notification for March 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bùi Đình Đạm, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hà Đông. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 07:57, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Tonlé Sap

Hi @JIlQIM, I have to tell you that I'm not impressed with your editing work on the Battle of Tonlé Sap page. When I reverted the large-scale, unexplained edits you and the anonymous IP made, introducing a variety of grammatical errors and non-encyclopedic content to the page, I provided a summary of my reasoning and encouraged dissenting editors to start a talk page discussion on the topic. You (and the anonymous IP, once again) proceeded to simply re-edit the page and reintroduce most of the content I removed, again, without bothering to provide a single edit summary. Yesterday, I decided to work with the new content but to copy edit it as I saw fit. I removed grammatical and markup errors as well as sections that bore either little relevance to the article topic or that simply didn't make sense. You and the IP lost no time in simply restoring everything I changed, not by reverting, but by slyly reinserting your preferred content—once again without a single edit summary! At this point, our back-and-forth edits have turned into an edit war, which is not permitted on WP. You have made zero effort to communicate with me about how to improve the page, and all you've done is introduce low-quality, sloppy work back into the article. This simply isn't ok, and I would very much appreciate it if you could fix your errors and begin interacting with editors in a collegial manner, as is expected on this platform. I'm letting you know that if you make no constructive effort to resolve our dispute in a reasonable period of time, I will restore the version of the page that I deem superior, and any further unjustified or unexplained reverts or restorations will be reported to administrators. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 16:32, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your advice! I have stopped renovating it for now. (JIlQIM (talk) 21:34, 23 April 2025 (UTC))[reply]

@JIlQIM, you seem to be back to your usual antics on this page, which suggests you haven't learned anything since our last altercation. If you persist in making disputed edits despite several reverts, you may receive a warning. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:15, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Communes of Cần Thơ

A tag has been placed on Category:Communes of Cần Thơ indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:42, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation of links on Template:Hanoi Municipality

Could you help to fix some links to disambiguatio pages on Template:Hanoi Municipality? The link to Phúc Sơn, Hương Sơn, Hòa Phú, Vĩnh Thanh and Tiến Thắng do not link to specific articles and I am unsure where they should be linking to.— Rod ^talk 07:51, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thank for your attention! (JIlQIM (talk) 07:55, 27 April 2025 (UTC))[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Hai Bà Trưng, Hanoi

A tag has been placed on Category:Hai Bà Trưng, Hanoi indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:01, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing

Please stop making changes to the administrative units of Vietnam. These proposals have not yet taken effect and we can't predict the future. Please stop jumping the gun. DHN (talk) 20:42, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. DHN (talk) 20:56, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Phú Diễn

A tag has been placed on Category:Phú Diễn indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:03, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ba Vì, Hanoi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ba Vì.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:57, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 2025

Hello, I'm Nahida. I noticed that you recently removed content from Cầu Giấy without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Nahida 🌷 14:08, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am very tired now after 12 hours of continuous work. Meanwhile, you still do not sympathize with my efforts and keep restoring outdated information. My posts are completely independent of your old information, but you continue to insult me and do not allow me to edit them. Do you think I can be calm with such behavior for so long? I have to sympathize with your lack of sleep, while instead of helping me, you delete all my contributions in a very cruel way. Does that mean you are trying to tease me to satisfy your needs? Every time I got home, I had to check to see if my post was still there. I was stressed, angry, and exhausted from being mentally terrorized for so many days. (JIlQIM (talk) 14:15, 1 May 2025 (UTC))[reply]
JIlQIM, the notice was only regarding removing content without a summary. You can always restore the version you edited. Please do not make personal attacks. Nahida 🌷 14:21, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your changes are jumping the gun. The proposed changes haven't happened yet until at least July if ever. You're being disruptive in your editing. DHN (talk) 15:06, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, I'm not trying to sabotage or offend anyone. I just hope you see my efforts. I have no problem with the way you do things, but right now my bone pain has made it impossible for me to run after all of you. JIlQIM (talk) 15:09, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Cầu Giấy, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. the 🥭 man (the 🥭 talk) 14:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Johnson524, and while reviewing new pages, I stumbled across a number of your edits/page moves, and am trying to make sense of the situation. I would appreciate your perspective on Talk:Hoàng Mai, Hanoi#Standardization of ward/district naming, cheers! Johnson524 19:21, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To sum up the discussion, Wikipedia is not a WP:CRYSTALBALL, and the title district probably shouldn't be dropped until they are moved in July. Cheers! Johnson524 20:00, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Thường Tín

A tag has been placed on Category:Thường Tín indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 23:41, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Sơn Tây, Hanoi

A tag has been placed on Category:Sơn Tây, Hanoi indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 23:41, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 2025

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that 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 ~~~~}}. Drmies (talk) 01:21, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't stop with the logged-out editing, the edit warring, and/or the passive-aggressive edit summaries you will simply be blocked indefinitely. Drmies (talk) 01:24, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that one or more recent edit(s) you made did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit 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)

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a 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! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:26, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JIlQIM,

Reading over all of the complaints on your User talk page, it seems like many of this disputes could be avoided if you included edit summaries explaining your editing decisions with every edit you make. It's not hard or complicated and is a courtesy to other editors that you work with. It also stops editors from simply reverting your edits because you have provided an explanation that helps other editors understand what you are trying to accomplish. You'll find that experienced editors tend to leave edit summaries for any substantial edits that others might have questions about.

I think once your block is over, you'll have a lot fewer disputes with your fellow editors if you use edit summaries and communicate with them. Going your own way is bound to lead to conflict as Wikipedia is a collaborative editing project. Good luck. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:31, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]