Hi Alexysun! I noticed your contributions to Minenwerfer and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Longhair\^talk 21:28, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Compton High School, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Latino. 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) 06:06, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are opening in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 1 September). A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:50, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election opens in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 15 September) and will last through 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:25, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick correction to the prior message about the 2022 MILHIST coordinator election! I (Hog Farm) didn't proofread the message well enough and left out a link to the election page itself in this message. The voting will occur here; sorry about the need for a second message and the inadvertent omission from the prior one. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:40, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election closes soon, at 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. The voting itself is occurring here If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I wanted to reply to the Wyly section you left on my talk page. If you look at the Wyly article before I started editing versus what was the end result, you will see a stark contrast and a dramatic improvement. The article before I started editing was clearly written by someone close to Sam Wyly or at the worst, paid by him. The article flouted his business acumen and industriousness and painted his multiple criminal and civil investigations as a witch hunt. By that indication I believe anyone would conclude that the article has been compromised. Any claim regarding Wyly that I could not find a source for, I did not include in the article and if I missed anything I apologize and appreciate the work of other editors such as yourself who review the changes. I want to thank you for reaching out to me and I look forward to editing with you in the future.

Yours Truly FictiousLibrarian (talk). 15:11, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Throast. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Kanye West, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 03:29, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 the Balkans or Eastern Europe. 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.

TylerBurden (talk) 21:35, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Meters. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, University of Science and Technology of China, 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 referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Meters (talk) 05:40, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion about whether add China or France as Principal Allied powers. I see you enolve the discussion before. [| Can you join the discussion?]

Hello, I am new in wiki. I see you in a discussion and also debate with others in their personal talk page. I think that may violate the wiki rule and may get ban from wiki by this behaviour. I think just discussion in the talk page is the best way and don't debate the same topic in others' personal talk page. You may invite others to join but not debate in their personal page. I may join that discussion later.Lijing1989 (talk)

Maybe. I'm tired of that discussion now. You can add a signature to your message by using four "~" like "Alexysun (talk) 03:26, 19 May 2023 (UTC)". Alexysun (talk) 03:26, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I add signature now. I'm not familiar with that. Discussing such matters can be very tedious and time-consuming. I agree that it's not worth spending a lot of time on it. I support you not to waste time on that. I joined the discussion, but I don't want to engage in arguments, as it would be original research and not in line with Wikipedia's rules. Instead, I will use historical documents as references. There are plenty of official documents in that time that prove China and France were major allies. I don't know why they are being ignored? Lijing1989 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 05:54, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

These guys are extremely Eurocentric and stubborn, so they stick with the idea of the "Big Three". Alexysun (talk) 04:39, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:04, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. This is a standard message to inform you that post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people 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. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:22, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I've reverted your undiscussed move of Mike Johnson (Louisiana politician). There is a banner right at the top of the page that says Please do not move this article until the discussion is closed. If an article is undergoing an RM, it should not be moved unilaterally. Thank you. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:29, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but who gets to decide when the discussion is closed? Alexysun (talk) 03:54, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RMs must remain open for one week. After that, any experienced uninvolved Wikipedian can close it. Uninvolved means the closer did not !vote in the discussion. The RM template will trigger the attention of folks that specialize in closing RMs, so shouldn't require any action on our side. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:33, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Steel1943. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:Mike Johnson (Louisiana politician) that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Steel1943 (talk) 20:51, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!!!!! Alexysun (talk) 03:53, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This was the comment. Telling someone to "shut yo goofy ass up" and calling them an "anonymous mf" are completely inappropriate. I am an administrator and this is a formal warning. If this behavior is repeated you will be blocked. Please carefully read WP:NPA. Wikipedia is not Reddit or an online forum where you can just cuss out other people and get into flame wars, it is more like a workplace where we always stay civil and we try to focus most of our discussion on improving encyclopedia articles. Thank you for your attention to this matter. –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:08, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. That's my bad. What the person wrote though was clearly bigoted and extremely anti-Republican Party. They went completely ad hominem on the Representative with no relation to the discussion at hand. They had no motives to talk about the disambiguation, but rather wanted to voice their grievances online. Alexysun (talk) 00:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

True. Their comment was really provocative. My tone was probably too harsh here, I should have read their comment more carefully, so sorry for that. I'm glad we're on the same page and hopefully it'll be smooth sailing going forward. –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:44, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki . Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alexysun

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Dan Leonard, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've proposed an article that you started, Fentanyl crisis in San Francisco, for deletion because it meets one or more of our deletion criteria, and I don't think that it is suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. The particular issue can be found in the notice that is now visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to contest the deletion:

1. Edit the page
2. Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. Click the Publish changes button.

If you object to the article's deletion, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the issues raised in the deletion notice. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Dan Leonard}}. And remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. Thanks!

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

Dan • ✉ 05:07, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at NationsBank, you may be blocked from editing. Graham87 (talk) 04:31, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The source says nothing about October 1998. Graham87 (talk) 10:41, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Graham87 The Bank of America article states:

"NationsBank of Charlotte acquired BankAmerica in October 1998 in what was the largest bank acquisition in history at that time." with that reference.

I did not write this sentence. If the reference does not say "October 1998" then this sentence may or may not be incorrect. I assumed the sentence was correct without reading through the reference.

Alexysun (talk) 17:21, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it's not safe to assume that a given reference supports a given fact in a Wikipedia article without checking first (or at least checking the page history), especially in an age when newer editors are encouraged to use such tools as Citation Hunt. In this case the reference was added well after the fact; I discovered this with WikiBlame. The month probably is correct but I don't have enough energy or interest to dig out a proper ref. Graham87 (talk) 03:32, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on NBSPLV requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Claggy (talk) 05:18, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to NBSPLV. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and they need to be solid independent reliable sources, unlike the three in the page now. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi Alexysun. I'm reaching out to you as another enthusiastic editor of the battle of shanghai page. it seems that this adachi guy has been implementing his own narrative of sihang warehouse by framing the battle as a skirmish and chinese propaganda. could you share you thoughts on this? Wahreit (talk) 03:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wahreit you are always welcome to tag me on these discussions or talk to me directly if you have questions/problems, evidently you are very interested in my contributions. The Battle of Shanghai was fought not by China alone, the Japanese perspective and their records, along with what third party observers saw should be included as well for a balanced narrative. As I've said in the Sihang Warehouse talk page, Robinson's book has been thoroughly debunked and is not a suitable source in an academic context. "Chinese Alamo" by Eric Niderost (which Robinson also cites) is not a suitable source either, there are no citations. The Battle of Shanghai page has a lot of other bad sources like this and I think overall you've been doing a good job at improving the page. If I truly had a narrative, I'd be fudging the Japanese numbers all over the place. Adachi1939 (talk) 04:22, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the reason why i haven't been willing to discuss this issue with you right now is because i've read your talk page. from what is visible, you have a habit of asserting japanese combat records as fact and aggressively confronting other editors when they disagree. this was seemingly or at least partially confirmed when i made a few edits to the sihang warehouse page some time ago, because you immediately reverted all of them without nuance. if we're going to have a conversation, then you gotta respect other editor's contributions and not resort to personal attacks on their character. for the time being, i'm going to gauge what other relevant users think of the situation. you're free to continue this discussion on my own talk page, but don't shadow me too closely. Wahreit (talk) 04:52, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I am trying to be nicer. Likewise it would be appreciated if you don't run around describing me as the "adachi guy" who is "intent on promoting his own version of the battle, whilst suppressing all dissenting viewpoints" every time I make some changes. Have you ever stopped to consider this sounds a lot like projection and you are in fact the one promoting your own version of the battle and attempting to suppress changes? Whoever wrote the prior version of events for the Sihang Warehouse section on the Battle of Shanghai article completely ignored Japanese sources. If anything that is suppression of dissenting viewpoints. I changed it so to offer a more balanced view of the events, while still keeping in Chinese claims. There is a lot more than just combat reports backing my edits. I have looked into a vast array of Japanese-language sources on the subject after exhausting English ones. Your initial edits to the article were not reverted without nuance for conflicting with my viewpoint, they were reverted because you asserted a division to be engaged in the battle using non-reputable sources when it was in fact was not even present in the area. I have no "version" or "viewpoint" regarding any conflict in the Second Sino-Japanese War. I don't think anybody making large edits should. Just use reliable sources and present the information in a neutral tone. Records from opposing sides rarely match perfectly, so when they inevitably have discrepancies, it's best to offer information from both sides and allow the readers to make their own decision. Wikipedia articles aren't meant to be anyone's personal soapbox. Adachi1939 (talk) 05:22, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

continue this in my personal talk page, i don't want alexysun waking up to a multi-paragraph dispute in his talk page. and again, refrain from personal attacks, because you just made another one in your response. Wahreit (talk) 05:34, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wahreit Hi Wahreit. First, Thank you for involving me. Sorry for taking a while to reply. I have not been paying attention to the Sihang Warehouse article recently, so I will have to go and take a look at what he has done. Alexysun (talk) 17:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no worries. take your time, your contributions and perspective are much appreciated. Wahreit (talk) 18:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

since you've stalked me here, hi again, adachi. Wahreit (talk) 18:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi Alexysun. just following up to ask what you personally think of this business. i just got back into it (because why not), and your input would be much appreciated. thanks partner. Wahreit (talk) 00:34, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wahreit Hi Wahreit, thank you for your message. I have not really ever researched into the Battle of Sihang Warehouse (as in read books/accounts on it outside Wikipedia), so I can't tell you what I believe in relation to the Japanese 3rd Division being there, but I will say that I was thinking about a way to resolve this conflict. The resolution would be writing in the article who claims that the 3rd Division was there, and sources where the 3rd Division was absent. So basically "X and X stated that the Japanese 3rd division participated in the battle. In X and X the 3rd division is not mentioned."

What do you think about this resolution? Alexysun (talk) 17:34, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the suggestion, i put those into the article. really hope no one gets upset by that. (if youre still stalking me adachi do smth less weird with your time, would ya) Wahreit (talk) 01:05, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

mans was UNCOMMITTED to not creeping on me. 🤣🤣🤣 Wahreit (talk) 17:31, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wahreit What’d he do? Alexysun (talk) 08:46, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i called him out for stalking me through your page and others (apologies for turning your talk page into a warzone). the first thing he did was whine about our chat here offending him on the admin board, further confirming the obvious fact hes a fan and he's shadowing me. the guy just cannot stay away 🤣🤣🤣 (adachi, i see you) Wahreit (talk) 16:50, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Russo-Japanese War, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Port Arthur.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 20:20, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Sheng Thao, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 20:37, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alexysun, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as NamelessLameless (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 03:20, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the works in progress, the talk page has the schedule. I always start the page once the week actually ends, midnight on Sunday, and thus all there are 7 days of data on the viewcounts tool (it was so much easier when there were bots that added all the numbers and thus we needed to only do write-ups!). Contributions are always welcome, I already liked that you stepped up to complete the latest one. igordebraga ≠ 21:16, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The draft for the latest one is here, if you're interested. igordebraga ≠ 06:22, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Igordebraga Thank you, I will take a look at what I can do! Alexysun (talk) 10:01, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Igordebraga What happened to the bots? Did the person that operated them get banned? I heard something around those lines once. Alexysun (talk) 10:03, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First one crashed as soon as 2020 started. A second one stopped mid-2022. A third barely entered 2023. But for all I know the responsible users just vanished rather than be banned. igordebraga ≠ 17:31, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 05:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 05:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:40, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not sure if it’s a policy violation, but please don’t do this in the future? It’s not productive, and it increases the heat in an already heated area. Thank you! FortunateSons (talk) 07:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@FortunateSons I was responding to a clear ad hominem attack from the other editor to me. Additionally instead of deleting their comment they crossed it out as if that does anything. It’s a half assed attempt to pretend to show regret or remorse. They should have just delete their comment. Alexysun (talk) 07:29, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand why you are frustrated, but this still isn’t how we should behave on wiki. Regarding the strike, per WP:Redact, one shouldn’t delete comments that are responded too or that exist for a while, unless they are bad enough for oversight, and because his comment is closer to snark (by copying your talk page) then an actual personal attack, that is unlikely to happen. They voluntarily removed the comment based on my request (see their talk page), which doesn’t make it good per se, but does indicate that they understand the issue and hopefully won’t do it again. Being snarky back doesn’t help anyone, so while you also striking would be great, at least stopping that is a reasonable expectation. Thank you!

You got me with that Rick-roll, nice job! I really need to stop clicking on links FortunateSons (talk) 07:57, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 12:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Sideshow (automobile exhibition), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 20:11, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alexysun. Thank you for your work on Fentanyl crisis in San Francisco. Another editor, Conyo14, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Continue adding content to this page. It is very well written, but do not leave California opioid crisis to dust.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Conyo14}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Conyo14 (talk) 04:42, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2024 Irondequoit stabbing and arson attack is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2024 Irondequoit stabbing and arson attack until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 09:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open! A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. Register your vote here by 23:59 UTC on 29 September! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You placed a neutrality tag in this edit: [1]. Please could you start a talk section that describes the neutrality issue so that it can be addressed. Thanks. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alexysun. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:NBSPLV, 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) 10:08, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Donald Trump article is under a requirement that "You must follow the bold-revert-discuss cycle if your change is reverted.. You may not reinstate your edit until you post a talk page message discussing your edit and have waited 24 hours from the time of this talk page message". Your edit here was reverted here, meaning that this edit of yours was inappropriate. Please self-revert and follow the discussion requirement. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria Alright let's talk about it. You reverted it for not being a reliable source? Also I couldn't find the revert edit so that's why I decided to put it back. Alexysun (talk) 00:53, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The initial revert is here; you need to revert your edit here. Once that's done we can discuss on the article's talk page. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But yeah thank you for being concerning about reliable sourcing, so let's take a look at some more:

https://www.findmypast.com/blog/new/donald-trump-family-tree

https://www.today.com/parents/donald-trump-family-tree-rcna178963

https://www.thetimes.com/world/us-world/article/donald-trump-family-tree-president-fzb3jp3v2

https://www.usatoday.com/story/graphics/2024/11/01/donald-trump-family-tree/75915418007/

https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/trump-family-tree

https://people.com/all-about-donald-trump-family-tree-7567639

The Times article is definitely a reliable source. Alexysun (talk) 00:57, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Pamela Price, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 06:04, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2024! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Nominations are open here and here respectively. The nomination period closes at 23:59 on 30 November 2024 when voting begins. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:20, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]