User talk:Gun Nut perk

Welcome!

Hello, Gun Nut perk, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Draft:Pronouns Fixed, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

Article development
Standard layout
Lead section
The perfect article
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page or you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! EDM fan 2 (talk) 19:49, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Pronouns Fixed

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Draft:Pronouns Fixed, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. EDM fan 2 (talk) 19:49, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022

Hello, I'm DB1729. I noticed that you recently removed content from Template:Asbox/doc 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. DB1729 (talk) 20:07, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Half-Life (video game). 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. -- ferret (talk) 14:46, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. McSly (talk) 19:18, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If it's that big of a deal I guess i'll cut it out Gun Nut perk (talk) 19:22, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In general, please realise that this site has been around a long time and there are standards both for how we write articles and how we resolve disputes. If you want to work with other editors, they'll be happy to work with you. The opposite of that is if you insist the place should be run according to your own principles, or if you post things like "Don't be a smartass saying, ... If you don't even search it up yourself!". That comes across as antagonistic. MartinPoulter (talk) 21:06, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in M4 Sherman. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you. Loafiewa (talk) 15:01, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lucky for you it is none standard.

I'm pretty sure what I did is in the green for wiki guidelines .

(I think) Gun Nut perk (talk) 15:02, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:EASTEREGG specifically advises against using easter egg links, a guideline page which is described by the page itself as a generally accepted standard, so I'm not really sure where you got the idea that it isn't standard. Loafiewa (talk) 15:08, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Appropriate links provide instant pathways to locations within and outside the project that can increase readers' understanding of the topic at hand. Whenever writing or editing an article, consider not only what to put in the article, but what links to include to help the reader find related information, and also which other pages should have links to the article

Wiki themselves stated ^ ^ ^ ^ Gun Nut perk (talk) 15:09, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not telling you that you cannot add any links at all to the article. Just not easter egg links, because they go against the guideline. Loafiewa (talk) 15:11, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at M4 Sherman shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. (Hohum ^@) 16:33, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please top edit warring. Please revert your last edit. and gain consensus on the article talk page before reintroducing bold edits per WP:BRD. It has been clearly explained to you why your edit is not appropriate. (Hohum ^@) 16:42, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hang on im finding a better source Gun Nut perk (talk) 16:44, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was talking about your repeated edit warring on the M4 Sherman page. However, I see you have just reintroduced your edit with the same bad source on the T-34 article again. That is not acceptable behaviour. Please revert this edit as well. Find a reliable source, and then discuss it on the talk page before reintroducing it. You've used up any goodwill with your current behaviour already. You've also been clearly warned that continuing this behaviour can lead in your account being blocked from editing. (Hohum ^@) 16:56, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on AR-15 style rifle. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. BilCat (talk) 04:37, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Flat Earth style

This is an invitation for you to join the discussion at Talk:Flat Earth#Bold text. Just plain Bill (talk) 19:32, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Loafiewa (talk) 19:59, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

...

I don't believe that a couple of links related to the article is worth actual administrators.

Now I'm being looked into by higher ups because I added the wiki link to the word "Israel?" Gun Nut perk (talk) 20:06, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest reading WP:IDHT. You've been warned countless times for edit warring by now, it is not the length or specific nature of the content you've added that is considered an issue, but the fact you have continually edit warred to insert it. Loafiewa (talk) 20:18, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But now you're reporting me being an "Inconvenience" a couple times.

You're breaking point was me linking a country from an article to its wiki? Gun Nut perk (talk) 21:26, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your recent edit here, as the editor above clearly stated in their edit summary, please read WP:OVERLINK... well known subjects, like countries, are not generally linked... - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:45, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

D/S Alert (Gun control)

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

–dlthewave ☎ 05:28, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Glock. - Adolphus79 (talk) 13:25, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Page Doesnt Exist

Hello Gun Nut perk,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Page Doesnt Exist for deletion, because it seems to be a test. Did you know that the Wikipedia Sandbox is available for testing out edits?

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Lithopsian (talk) 15:55, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy to move what you were working on at Page Doesnt Exist to your Userspace if you'd like to continue working on it, then you can edit at your leisure without time constraints. Just let me know if you'd like me to do that. Happy‑melon 16:16, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I would appreciate it if you'd kindly. Gun Nut perk (talk) 14:01, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ad Orientem (talk) 16:32, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Repeated links

You seem to be taking MOS:REPEATLINK a bit too literally. While some of your link removals have been fine, this one removed the first occurrence of two links after the lead. MOS:REPEATLINK states that a link "may be repeated if helpful for readers, such as in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, hatnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead." Furthermore, MOS guidelines are not absolute, and WP:IAR may apply in specific cases. - ZLEA _T\^C 15:49, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ZLEA _T\^C 14:48, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Tiger I shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. (Hohum ^@) 12:37, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. (Hohum ^@) 15:41, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

On your user page, you state: "I normally put my replies that would be in the pages Wiki talk in my reverts due to habit."

You need to try to break that habit. Per Wikipedia:SUMMARYNO: "Avoid long summaries. Edit summaries are not for explaining every detail, writing essays about "the truth", or long-winded arguments with fellow editors. For discussions, you should use the talk page." Thanks. BilCat (talk) 23:19, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Tiger I. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 16:10, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Page Doesn't Exist (Or isn't made)

Hello, Gun Nut perk. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Page Doesn't Exist (Or isn't made), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:14, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Draft:Page Doesn't Exist (Or isn't made)

If this was the first article that you created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Draft:Page Doesn't Exist (Or isn't made), was deleted as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:28, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]