Hello, Raydann, 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! - wolf 17:04, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
- Introduction
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
- Frequently asked questions
- Cheatsheet
- Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse
- The Help Desk, for more advanced questions
- Help pages
- Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
A barnstar for you!
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
Nice! EditingProperly (talk) 10:23, 25 September 2022 (UTC) |
Thank You!
Thank you for the barnstar!!! It is always nice to be appreciated. And have a nice day, and night, and all the time:)--Nous (talk) 13:28, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
Since you are a "WikiCat"... have another kitten to play with. :)
— Moops ⋠T⋡ 14:50, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Awww, that’s cute! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.98.80.108 (talk) 13:16, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Rollback and reviewer
Hello Raydann. Your account has been granted the "rollbacker" and "pending changes reviewer" user rights. These user rights allow you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes and quickly revert the edits of other users.
- Please keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
- Rollback should never be used to edit war.
- Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
- Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin).
- The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection enabled is located at Special:StablePages. You may find the following pages useful to review:
- Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing.
- Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes.
- Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of reviewer or rollback. If you no longer want either of these user rights, contact me and I'll remove it, alternatively you can leave a request on the administrators' noticeboard. Happy editing! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:38, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
I've done them both for a one-month trial but come and see me in a few weeks and if there are no problems I'll happily make them permanent. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:38, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, I'll surely make good use of the tools I can now use. Happy editing :D ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 09:22, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
Do remove the comment raised
The page i created is about a students organised welfare community in India. It does'nt have any private or self promotion. JJ WICKS (talk) 13:57, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
Mike Ceresia
What was it that you found not to be neutral? Racquetball1 (talk) 14:46, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Racquetball1! Thank you for your edits, but Wikipedia requires that you add a reliable source to the content you add so that it is factually correct, and make sure the content you add is neutral in tone, neither positive, neither negative. Please see WP:NPOV & WP:RS. ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 14:55, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
Murder of Bianca Devins
Hi Raydann, I don't understand why you removed the changes to the aforementioned article. The definition of "orbiting" is completely wrong. It has nothing to do with stalking, rather with the belief held by certain individuals that women often have a possible romantic backup in the form of an "orbiter". Please do revert your change as my contribution, albeit maybe written in poor form, was bona fide and more accurate than the current definition. Thanks, Tom. PS: I shall make an account so I don't have to keep editing anonymously 213.37.16.41 (talk) 20:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
- Hi there Tom, I understand that given the context, the word 'orbit' was a bit confusing, but it was not at all wrong. While the content you added was in good faith, it was not very clear to read and broke the flow of the article. Even more, you used the term 'beta orbiters' [1] without providing a reliable source. Please read the WP:MOS, it will provide beneficial information for improving Wikipedia. I would encourage you to create an account and use it to edit because edits from IP users are subject to a little bit more suspicion. Happy Editing! ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 06:09, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi Raydann. For future reference, there's no need to notify users that you've reported them to UAA. Thanks. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 05:49, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- Got it, thanks! ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 05:51, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
vijayanagara discription article
vijayanagara inscription mentioned as karnata kingdom not hindu kingdom don't change historical sources.. not a single inscription in Vijayanagara empire mentioned as hindu kingdom..it's consider hindu kingdom in 20th century not vijayanagara king era time so don't add based on magizine add on inscription source Pruthv 2345 (talk) 07:31, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- Dear @Pruthv 2345, please understand that I did not changed any information on the page Vijayanagara Empire, nor did I introduce any new information. I simply reverted the changes you made (unsourced [2] and non-constructive [3]) as did other editors [4] [5]. Please take a look at Wikipedia's policy at Point of view and the 3 revert rule of Wikipedia. ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 11:54, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- you fisrt reasarch and understand on Vijayanagara empire and next talk.. I added information on inscription sources with proof .. Pruthv 2345 (talk) 11:58, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- As far as your contributions show, you have not added any reliable sources to back up your edits. Please understand what reliable sources are and how to cite a citation. Thanks. ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 12:02, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- you fisrt reasarch and understand on Vijayanagara empire and next talk.. I added information on inscription sources with proof .. Pruthv 2345 (talk) 11:58, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
vijayanagara empire Official Name is karnata empire.. ==
vijayanagara empire Official Name is karnata empire.. mentioned in inscriptions by kings in 14th -17th century on empire administration
vijayanagara term used as an empire by 20th century historians . so now we had as inscriptional source Pruthv 2345 (talk) 13:13, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
False positive
Hi Raydann! I noticed you've been using AntiVandal. Just wanted to let you know that this edit of yours was a false positive i.e. something you should not have reverted as a minor edit without an edit summary. The warning you gave was also incorrect.
The IP edit is, in fact, an edit that should have been reverted, but only because of the factual circumstances (it is correct that the grandmaster shares his name with Tigran Petrosian, but "Petrosyan" is an alternate spelling of both names and not done to distinguish the two). Both of the user's edits were factually accurate and good faith, including the quoted lengthy rant by Petrosian (which should also have been reverted, not as vandalism, but due to MOS:QUOTE). — Bilorv (talk) 15:58, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Bilorv, thanks for noticing the false positive. I agree that the edit was indeed in good faith. I reverted it just because if a person shares similar name with another person, it should be noted at the top in a hatnote as per MOS:SO and not in the article itself.
- Regarding the warning, I also agree that I am at fault. AntiVandal offers 10 warning templates to warn a user, namely Vandalism, Disruption, Deleting, Advertising, spam links, Unsourced material, Editing tests, Commentary, POV & Factual errors. There is no option in AntiVandal to warn the user with some other template. Yes it's possible to manually go to the diff and use Twinkle or RedWarn to revert and give a particular template, it is a bit time consuming. I know this should be followed, and users should be given specific warning for their edit. I just thought the vandalism warning would be a generic one and would convey the message.
- Anyways, in the future I'll pay more attention towards edits which seem to be in good faith, and maybe I'll ask Ingenuity if it's possible to introduce a Drop-down menu with more user warning templates to AntiVandal. Until then, Happy Editing! ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 18:26, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
- Glad to hear your perspective and see you've taken the message in the positive spirit it was intended in.As an FYI, you don't have to revert with Twinkle to open it on the talk page (likely as "TW" under the top menu, depending on your skin/preferences) and give a template; it's optional to link the specific page, which you can do manually.Sometimes messages do have to be manual: if a template doesn't fit then you don't pick the closest one, but write your own message. I notice you have a banner at the top of this page asking not to be templated, and indeed I did write a custom message. It takes longer to give custom feedback, but I wouldn't call it time-consuming, and it is important that people making good faith edits aren't scared off with harsh cookie cutter text.Thanks! — Bilorv (talk) 19:19, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
- Sure thing @Bilorv. Thank you very much for your constructive feedback . After all, mistakes are what makes someone better over time. See you around! ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 05:53, 31 October 2022 (UTC)