User talk:Vanleos

March 2025

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Galveston, Texas, 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. See Talk:Gulf of Mexico#FAQ Leonidlednev (T, C, L) 21:21, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, 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.

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.

Valereee (talk) 15:13, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stop

There is no consensus to rename the Denali article. Please don't arbitrarily move it. I also suggest reading WP:STICK. — Czello ^(music) 21:00, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 2025

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain pages (Denali and Talk:Denali) for disruptive editing.

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) 15:16, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Me

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Vanleos (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Free Speech is back. Also, I would like to give my say in the RM currently in progress.

Decline reason:

You have no free speech here. See WP:FREESPEECH. Yamla (talk) 14:59, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Please stop adding sections on Joe Biden to Scranton, PA page

I removed your contribution regarding Joe Biden that you added to the Scranton, PA page. Joe Biden is already listed under the Notable People section. Please stop adding as this information is redundant. Thank you. Chalon10 (talk) 23:21, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Attempting to re-open closed discussions

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:05, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Liberation Day (United States) (April 15)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Bonadea were:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Liberation Day (United States) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

bonadea contributions talk 17:34, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vanleos! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! bonadea contributions talk 17:34, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stop - Scranton Talk Page

Stop adding Topics that are just a redundant notification of your edit updates to the Talk page What. The talk page is for discussing improvements to the page not for posting notification of edits. Your notes on the "Edit Summary" when you make an edit are sufficient. I know you are aware that you are not supposed to be doing this as I see that several editors/admins have addressed this with you previously. If you do not stop using the Talk Page inappropriately I will request that you be blocked from the page. Chalon10 (talk) 18:56, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Liberation Day (United States) (April 16)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Bonadea were:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Liberation Day (United States) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

bonadea contributions talk 07:20, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 2025

At the least while you are under a partial block, you might consider avoiding gross violations of Biographies of living persons [1]. Referring to a person as a "fraud" who has never been charged with such, much less convicted, is not allowed. O3000, Ret. (talk) 21:47, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The only reason he was not charged is because Sleepy Joe pardoned him. You may want to be familiar with the history of the topic, before you leave a message on my talk page. Vanleos (talk) 14:45, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CT alert for Covid related pages

You have recently made edits related to COVID-19, broadly construed. This is a standard message to inform you that COVID-19, broadly construed is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Doug Weller talk 10:48, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]