User talk:Renamed user weifjgoiwvofjqoieio

Welcome!

Hello, Granticus31, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Johns Hopkins University. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Sauzer (talk) 18:19, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 2019

Hello, I'm SacredDragonX. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, 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 the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. SacredDragonX (talk) 21:16, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting

You need to read WP:3RR. You're reverting too frequently at Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This is a quick way to get blocked. The way out, as I've already suggested, is to self-revert and discuss on the talk page. Making changes and then discussing them is the wrong sequence when your changes have been challenged. EddieHugh (talk) 17:35, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

EddieHugh I'm very sorry and I'm new to making edits on controversial pages, so please forgive my ignorance. (In fact, I'm not sure if I'm commenting in the correct place right now.) I'm learning the hard way... I think I understand now (I got the order of operation wrong). I'll review these materials and won't make edits until I'm more confident with the modus operandi on wikipaes.

Generally – post and respond to things to do with editing behaviour on user talk pages; and post and respond to things to do with an article's content on that article's talk page. Controversial topics are more fraught, partly because more people edit them... it's very difficult (and not a good idea to try) to impose changes on a controversial article that is stable because of a hard-won consensus that is usually a compromise. EddieHugh (talk) 17:59, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Editing collaboratively

WP is a collaborative effort. When another editor reverts your additions and give reasons for it, you should address those reasons on Talk, and not just re-insert your additions -- see WP:BRD as a guideline. Even more so when two experienced editors revert your additions. Edit summaries are not good places for discussion.--Macrakis (talk) 01:40, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I see above on this page that you were warned recently for edit warring, and despite your bluster it's obvious you know nothing about Harvard. (John Harvard was a leader of Harvard University (!) -- what?) What you're trying to force into the article is a mixture of misstatement and vagueness and tells the reader essentially nothing.
As for the Cambridge article, the idea that its first paragraph should single out Harvard is beyond preposterous. Now cut it out. E Eng 07:38, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]