User talk:Igiveupicantchooseadecentusernamewithoutitbeingtaken

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Igiveupicantchooseadecentusernamewithoutitbeingtaken, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! KylieTastic (talk) 13:57, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Directories and indexes Department directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our new user help forum, the Teahouse The Help Desk, for more advanced questions Help pages Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

This is Igiveupicantchooseadecentusernamewithoutitbeingtaken's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Wicks (hairstyle) (March 15)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Wicks (hairstyle) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Wicks (hairstyle), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

KylieTastic (talk) 13:56, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Igiveupicantchooseadecentusernamewithoutitbeingtaken! Having an article 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! KylieTastic (talk) 13:56, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Wicks (hairstyle) (March 15)[edit]

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Wicks (hairstyle) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Wicks (hairstyle), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

Sulfurboy (talk) 15:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Wicks (hairstyle) (March 18)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Eagleash was:

This is not the correct place to request new redirects. Please follow the instructions at Articles for creation/Wizard-Redirects. Thank you.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Wicks (hairstyle) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Wicks (hairstyle), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

Eagleash (talk) 06:18, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey[edit]

It's pretty obvious that when you submitted that article on "Slavery in New Spain", you just took the article from es.wiki and put it through Google Translate.

Don't do that. For one thing, you broke most of your templates, filenames, etc. Also, you need to mention on the talk page that it's based on es.wiki. Please fix that now. DS (talk) 17:18, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2020[edit]

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, as you did at Okra, you may be blocked from editing. Work toward consensus rather than repeat-reverts. See WP:CON - go to the talk page to work it out. Zefr (talk) 18:37, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okra edits[edit]

You are still edit warring and being disruptive to article improvements. Explain why these extensive edits were reverted without discussion or good-faith discussion with another editor trying to make the article etymology content and reference sections consistent with other articles. Zefr (talk) 02:43, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Every edit I have done has improved the article. I've added Information and sources supporting them about the etymology of the scientific name as well as common names. Every edit (I've seen) that you've edited has disrupted the improvements made on the article. For example on one previous edit you made you kept part of the etymology of the word gumbo on the paragraph about the etymology of the word okra. For another example more recently you reworded the last sentence about how words in other languages used to describe the plant that stem from the root of gumbo not make sense by changing the sentence's meaning completely. Igiveupicantchooseadecentusernamewithoutitbeingtaken (talk) 03:31, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Our role as editors is to write clearly and provide accurate sources formatted correctly per WP:CIT and WP:REFB. I rewrote your own content to improve clarity by separating the scientific name from the common names, and using syntax edits to clarify. I reformatted all the references for consistency with Wikipedia policy - which you did not do, then you reversed everything to your inconsistently formatted sources. My version provides clarity for users unfamiliar with this plant as a food by stating the information in plain English, whereas your version is less clear and verbose. You are a new editor with few contributions, so perhaps you do not understand that this is supposed to be a collaborative process. But you are taking the stand that only your version - including poorly formatted and irregular sources - is acceptable (to you). I took the dispute to the talk page where other editors could provide input if given enough time to evaluate and provide input, but you insist on edit-warring and maintaining your own version. WP:BRD means a constructive new version is left in place until the talk page discussion is settled for new edits per WP:CON. You are violating good-faith edits, the consensus process, and edit-warring, and you have passed WP:3RR. This can get you into trouble with administrators. Zefr (talk) 14:05, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]