User talk:145.129.136.48

do you mean saga, as one form of verbal folklore?[edit] If you are talking about the oral form of saga in English, that needs to be clarified in the topic of Folklore. In this article we are just talking about how to study different forms of folklore, either oral folklore, customary folklore, or material folklore. We are not yet discussing all the different forms that these different folklore artifacts take. Which would include a discussion of the oral type of saga. Let me know if this clarifies this for you.Smithriedel 01:05, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

You have a response.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:05, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm RexxS. I wanted to let you know that some of your recent contributions to Talk:Jacques Cousteau have been reverted or removed because they seem to be defamatory or libellous. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. RexxS (talk) 19:32, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello, 145.129.136.48. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Help desk.
Message added 16:00, 4 May 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

- FlightTime (open channel) 16:00, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I think you may misunderstand what article Talk pages are for. They are there for discussing how to improve the article. They are NOT for giving your opinions about the topic of the article, as you did here, here, here, here, and here. These are a violation of WP:NOTFORUM. Please confine your comments on article Talk pages to those which may help improve the article. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 23:07, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month from certain namespaces (Talk) for misuse of article talk pages after warning. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.  Doug Weller talk 14:11, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I gather from your message on my talk page that you may not understand that you are blocked only from editing article talk pages - you had enough warnings. And yes, I do have the authority to do that. Doug Weller talk 17:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, with over 230,000 edits I don't understand Wikipedia. Take a look at the top of my user page. And if I wasn't authorised, I couldn't do it, could I? Doug Weller talk 19:15, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

awww

Oleynikov Oleksandr (talk) 15:12, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

awww

Oleynikov Oleksandr (talk) 15:13, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

awww

Oleynikov Oleksandr (talk) 15:15, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You recently wrote the following on my Talk page:

Moved from User talk:Mathglot § Mathglot

Hello again, 145.129.136.48,

I've moved the discussion here from my Talk page, so you'll see my response, and also so you'll be able to refer to it later if you wish to; it will eventually get archived on my Talk page and will become hard to locate.

Regarding your most recent comments (see box), I had no idea who you were or what you were talking about, until I came here to your talk page and found an old discussion entitled "#NOTFORUM violations" above, dated fourteen months ago, where I explained to you about Talk page usage, and your behavior on a number of Talk pages that needed attention. It looks like you didn't take that on board, because a few months later, you were blocked for this behavior for a month.

I don't know why you've chosen to raise this topic now, as to my knowledge, we have had no interaction in over a year. I'm even having trouble understanding what you were trying to say above. So, at this time, I'll just reiterate the importance of following all Wikipedia policies and guidelines, including those about proper Talk page behavior. Please make sure that anything you add to an article Talk page is directly related to improving the article in some way, and avoid general observations, thoughts, and general debate about the topic of the article that has nothing to do with improving the article itself; that would be considered a WP:NOTFORUM violation, and could be collapsed or removed.

If you have any questions about Talk page guidelines, or any other Wikipedia questions, you can ask at the WP:Tea house or Help desk. You can also type a question here on your Talk page, and addi the token {{Help me}} at the end of your question, and an experienced user will be along to help you out. Hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 11:21, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So, I had a look at some of your contributions, and I note that you have made some Talk page contributions which tend to demonstrate that you have not been following the Talk page recommendations:

• your edit at Talk:Hans Eysenck#Hans Eysenck? was deleted by a third editor as a violation of WP:TALK
• your edit at Talk:Rebecca (1940 film)#horror? is a violation of WP:NOTFORUM. I've collapsed it.
• your edit at Talk:Agnosticism was deleted by a fourth editor, as it was not about improving the article.

Other musings of yours on article Talk pages got some responses from other editors attempting to interact with you, but also did not tend to improve the article: Talk:Roman dictator#History, Talk:David O. Selznick#‎David O. Selznick?, Talk:Swan#Exhaustive? and others. I would advise you to seriously read through the guideline at WP:TALK, and confine your Talk page edits to questions or comments that very concretely address the issue of how to improve the article. If your comments aren't about that, then don't add them. If you are blocked again for the same thing you were blocked for before, without showing you understand what is wrong and how to stop it, your next block will likely be for more than a month; maybe two months, or even longer.

You may interpret this as "severe criticism" if you wish, but it really isn't; it's just an accurate assessment of where you are right now, and an attempt to inform you now, so you can change your behavior before you suffer the consequences of it. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 11:52, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have a response. I have no idea if it is related to the above section.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:10, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]