Hello, and Welcome to the Wikipedia, GM11! Hope you enjoy editing here and becoming a Wikipedian! Here are a few perfunctory tips to hasten your acculturation into the Wikipedia experience:
I had to revert your edits to the New Jersey Devils page. If you read up on the help pages above, it should help you provide good edits in the future that will not be reverted. If you would like more information on why I reverted your edits, you can contact me on my talk page.
You are strongly encouraged to consider following the Wikipedia Manual of Style, since many of your edits are departing from the customary guidelines in ways that other editors report as being very disagreeable. Wikipedia does not require writers to follow all or any of these rules, but their efforts will be more appreciated when they do so. -Muéro01:55, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent contribution(s) to Wikipedia did not provide specific references or sources. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a drive to improve the quality of Wikipedia by encouraging editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. Editors may choose to remove material you have contributed if it is not verifiable. Please provide specific references in your contributions to any books, articles, websites or other reliable sources that will allow people to verify the content. You can use a citation method listed at inline citations that best suits each article. Thanks! --Muéro19:25, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've perused your edits to various hockey-related articles, and I'm concerned that they frequently introduce non-neutral material, rarely cite sources, and often have an unencylopedic tone. Wikipedia should read like an encyclopedia, not like a local sports report. I have three specific concerns with your recent edits to New York Islanders:
First, many of your changes to the writing are difficult to read or even ungrammatical. You added this passage to a sentence: " although Resch was expended during the season — Smith's strong play despite only once finishing a season with lower goals against average than Resch did such."
Second, your edits sometimes fail to follow the Manual of Style and conventions, such as your changing the accepted "Stanley Cup champion" to "Stanley Cup Champion" and the accepted "first round series" to "first-round series".
Third, you changed the article to say that the number of points that Bryan Trottier scored in his rookie season was 98, not 95, as the citation says. Introducing incorrect information compromises Wikipedia, and you did not provide another citation or submit the question to review by other editors on the article's Talk page.
You may not have been aware of it, but Wikipedia has its own style guide described in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Please try to follow its advice. Edits that do not follow these guidelines may be changed to match what the WP:MOS recommends. Wikipedia does not require writers to follow all or any of these rules, but their efforts will be more appreciated when they do so. Croctotheface14:42, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is an encyclopedia, and the language used should reflect that. While phrases like "stylistic ex-Boston Bruins bench boss Don Cherry" may seem more colorful and are acceptable in sports journalism, here they are considered point-of-view statements. Read WP:NPOV for more info.
Yet again, your edits are not encyclopedic. It would be to everyone's benefit for you to read up on WP:NPOV and WP:MoS, which would greatly improve your edits to Wikipedia and save other editors the need to go in and clean them up after you. Croctotheface21:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is your last warning. The next time you violate Wikipedia's NPOV rule by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to Martin Brodeur, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Croctotheface03:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Dan Blackburn. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --JForget22:24, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I see on your talk page that you have been asked many times to change your editing style to be more encyclopedic. Please heed this advice, much of the stuff you have added in the last few days is irrelevant. Thanks. Dbrodbeck (talk) 20:11, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, GM11, and welcome to Wikipedia! I am Cinemaniac and I would like to thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~), which are produced by clicking on the button; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Also, I think that you might want to join the the adopt-a-user project, where advanced editors can guide you in your first experiences here; so check it out if you want. Oh, yes — and by the way: Thank you for your excellent contribution to the Mel Blanc article. I really appreciate it. Again, welcome!
You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)
I have just removed a bunch of links from Bugsy and Mugsy, which I believe you were responsible for. The plot summary was certainly very detailed, but... links should be used sparingly, for concepts or things that people might be unfamiliar with or for related articles with additional information - not for ordinary words like "rabbit", "second", or "14". See the Wikipedia Style pages for more info on this. Brianyoumans (talk) 02:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: when you add a link, please make sure that your link does not go to a redirect (for instance, a link on "colour" gets redirected to "color".) Properly, the link should be done like this: colour. Brianyoumans (talk) 16:05, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. When you recently edited Nebraska, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Native American (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Albuquerque Isotopes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Walter White (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Please stop. If you continue to use disruptive or hard to read formatting, as you did in Duck, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Pekinduck (talk) 19:22, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10... 100... 200
Hi GM11. When you add content to an article, as you have to the article Moaning Lisa, please cite a reliable source for the content you're adding or changing. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources. Thank you. Theleftorium 14:54, 11 February 2010 (UTC)