User talk:Actuallyjoseph

August 2021

Hello, I'm DanielRigal. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Mark Meechan seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DanielRigal (talk) 22:44, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

No More Changes moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, No More Changes, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ~Styyx^Talk? 18:03, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

August 2022

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Metallica. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 01:09, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. FMSky (talk) 04:30, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Zeke Zettner, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Williamson. 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) 09:15, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

September 2022

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at The Beatles. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 23:59, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

October 2022

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at The Hype (band). Sundayclose (talk) 03:02, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Timelines and other edits

You have improperly formatted almost all (if not all) timelines that you have added to articles. Competence is required to edit Wikipedia. You don't have to be competent in every aspect of Wikipedia, but if you make numerous similar edits (such as timelines), you must be competent in doing so. And you clearly don't know what you're doing. Don't add any more timelines until you learn how to do it. If you can't figure it out, place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will come along to help. Articles are not the place to experiment in learning how to edit. If you want to practice editing, use your sandbox.

Secondly, you have received numerous warnings for making unsourced or other problem edits. Everything you add to an article must be properly sourced, and that includes timelines. If you add a timeline, everything in the timeline must be previously cited to a reliable source somewhere in the article.

And finally, you have made no effort to communicate with other editors who point out your problem edits. This indicates that you don't take the warnings seriously. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort. Not communicating is not an option. If you continue this pattern of editing, you are quickly headed for loss of editing privileges. Sundayclose (talk) 03:24, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

I would justify the accusation of improper formatting by not citing sources because the source (members, dates, etc) is on the page itself, I only programmed concise timelines to show it more effectively. I don’t communicate with editors who tell me off mainly because I don’t really know how to respond to being told something isn’t good beyond fixing the error if I see it as one; a lot of people argue on editing pages with heavy amounts of unprofessionalism and I’d like to avoid that. Also, a lot of my initially removed edits do end up actually being used, such as when I put lead and rhythm guitars on the Beach Boys’ timeline or when I got rid of a problematic Beatles timeline that claimed John Lennon played bass in 1963. A lot of my disputes are more about subjectivity than anything else. If there’s any other issues with the timelines, let me know and I’ll correct them. Actuallyjoseph (talk) 16:14, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Much of what you put in timelines was not sourced in the article. That "justification" has no meaning. No one has "told you off"; you received standard, justified, and necessary warning templates endorsed by Wikipedia. So there's no excuse for not communicating. Whether some of your edits are eventually used is not an acceptable excuse; mixing bad edits with good edits does not justify the bad edits. And it is simply untrue that "a lot of your edits are about subjectivity" when you make changes to an article that are contrary to the cited sources without providing sources to back up your changes. All of my and others' warnings still stand. And you have racked up enough warnings within a short six weeks to lose your editing privileges. You are now skating on thin ice. Click the links in all of the warnings and read the policies and guidelines before continuing to edit. And again, if there's something you don't understand place {{helpme}} on your talk page. And communicate when editors message you. Sundayclose (talk) 18:28, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Regarding your poorly formatted timelines, the fact that you don't even appear to know how they appear compared to properly formatted timelines is an indication that you are oblivious to how a timeline is supposed to be formatted. It's not my responsibility to tutor you in making timelines, but as just one of several problems, compare the correctly formatted timeline in The Beatles with your attempt in this edit. In the properly formatted timeline, if I want to see when Stu Sutcliffe played his instrument, I can look at the horizontal axis and see that it was a time span roughly between early 1960 until mid-1961. Now, let's try to find the time span with your timeline. The horizontal axis has nothing. If I knew nothing about Beatles history, I could guess that it could have been in any decade of the 20th century. You didn't bother to actually look at what your edit produced. If you want to continue learning about timelines, first go to H:ET; click every link and read every word. Then, create a few timelines in your sandbox. Then put {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask someone to look for errors and advise you about corrections. Sundayclose (talk) 23:58, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:No More Changes

Hello, Actuallyjoseph. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:No More Changes, 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) 22:03, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:No More Changes

Hello, Actuallyjoseph. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "No More Changes".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:21, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

February 2023

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Mötley Crüe. Sundayclose (talk) 19:07, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Sources For Your Changes To The Nirvana Timeline?

"Krist Novoselic provided backing vocals at numerous gigs on the final European tour"

I decided not to undo your edit, because that could be very frustrating for you (as it has been for me). However, I don't recall any scenarios that Krist did backing vocals. Could you show me some clips? Thank you! BoxxyBoy (talk) 22:50, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

At their final gig in Munich on March 1st, 1994, Krist performs backing vocals Actuallyjoseph (talk) 07:19, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

March 2023

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Sex Pistols. Sundayclose (talk) 15:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Add The Osmonds and List of Motörhead band members. You are on the verge of losing your editing privileges. If there's something about "unsourced" that you don't understand, ask right here, right now. After your next unsourced edit you will be blocked. Sundayclose (talk) 15:18, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Why would I need to add a citation onto a timeline when the citation is on the list of members right next to it? Is this about the specific dates a member was in on a timeline not being on the members list? Actuallyjoseph (talk) 17:57, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Did you actually look at the list of band members? One, and only one, Sex Pistols band member has a citation, and even that citation has nothing about that band member. You clearly have not read WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:BURDEN, or you don't understand what you read, or you are intentionally ignoring those policies. You've accumulated a lot of warnings on this talk page. It looks like the only thing that will get your attention is losing editing privileges. The final warning above still stands, and this is my final comment to you. Sundayclose (talk) 18:58, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Alright then mate Actuallyjoseph (talk) 20:01, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

I don’t really get why I should be the one getting punished if it’s pretty clear that these citation issues aren’t my fault, I’m just programming a visualisation for the information in the article Actuallyjoseph (talk) 20:02, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

I said my previous comment would be my last to you, but your last response reeks of irresponsibility and an unjustified sense of entitlement. Here is the serious problem with your approach to editing, which is: If I make an edit that I think looks good, I can forget all of the core principles by which Wikipedia operates. So any of us (or is it just you???) can write anything we wish in an article if we think it looks good. So, for example, I could put Adolf Hitler in the timeline for the Sex Pistols because I like the way it looks. If everyone here had that approach, this place would be utter chaos. What do you think makes you so special that you don't have to follow the same rules as everyone else? If you can't change your thinking about editing, this is not the place for you. Sundayclose (talk) 20:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

The members I list on the timelines are the members already listed in various sections of the band’s article. Why would I need to citate the article I’m editing when that information is already present on it? As I’ve already said, I’m visualising the information that is *already on the article*. I think Hitler as an example is a bit of a strange choice. Why not mention another musician, or better yet, read what I bloody well said and what the rest of the article says before calling it “unsourced”? Actuallyjoseph (talk) 23:00, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

AGAIN, everything must be sourced. All of the details for every band member are NOT sourced in the article. You completely missed the point regarding Hitler (no surprise there). I used it as an absurd example to illustrate how absurd your approach to editing is (i.e., "If I like the way it looks, I can add it to the article unsourced"). It's pointless for me to continue here. You have received all of the warnings above. It's your choice whether you follow policies or lose your editing privileges. Sundayclose (talk) 23:05, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

The "band members" section right above the timeline already has the band members. I still don’t get why I should be penalised if the information I am simply programming into a visualisation is inaccurate. Additionally, stop being condescending, it doesn’t make you sound intelligent, you just sound smug and self-righteous. Your "authority" doesn’t scare anyone. Actuallyjoseph (talk) 23:09, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia cannot be your source

Take another look at WP:USERG which lists various sources you cannot use, including websites that allow online users to change the information. Wikipedia is one of those disallowed sources. Binksternet (talk) 01:26, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

April 2023

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at List of Black Sabbath and Heaven & Hell members. Sundayclose (talk) 03:22, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)