Alves Stargazer
October 2022
edit Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contribution(s). I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, while user talk pages permit a small degree of generalisation, other talk pages are strictly for discussing the topic of their associated main pages and many of them have special instructions on the top. They are not a general discussion forum about unrelated topics. If you have questions or ideas and are not sure where to post them, consider asking at the Teahouse. Thanks. MrOllie (talk) 00:54, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but how was it an unrelated topic? While Rationalwiki is not used (i hope) as a source for Wikipedia it should be quite relevant that we're talking of an echo chamber handled by extremists which credibility is almost as low as Conservapedia. At the moment reading our Wiki page it looks like it's something sensible to read, which is... honestly just misleading. Alves Stargazer (talk) 14:53, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
February 2024
edit Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
- Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
- With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button
located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. Ertal72 (talk) 20:49, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Welcome!
editHi Alves Stargazer! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
The rule that affects you most as a new or IP editor is the prohibition on making any edit related to the Arab–Israel conflict unless you are logged into an account and that account is at least 30 days old and has made at least 500 edits.
This prohibition is broadly construed, so it includes edits such as adding the reaction of a public figure concerning the conflict to their article or noting the position of a company or organization as it relates to the conflict.
The exception to this rule is that you may request a specific change to an article on the talk page of that article or at this page. Please ensure that your requested edit complies with our neutral point of view and reliable sourcing policies, and if the edit is about a living person our policies on biographies of living people as well.
Any edits you make contrary to these rules are likely to be reverted, and repeated violations can lead to you being blocked from editing.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
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:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:34, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
May 2024
edit Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Rebecca Hazelton. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Innisfree987 (talk) 13:33, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Please do not revert carelessly other people edits.
- The links and the images to google trends showed clearly Rebecca Hazelton's fame progression. Your thoughtless edit has erased some image and it's now inconvenient to undo it easily.
- Use the talk page next time you have an issue with other people contribution, so that you don't end up ruining their work with your objections. Thank you. Alves Stargazer (talk) 05:02, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- The removal was appropriate and in accordance with policy. The images were deleted at Wikimedia Commons because they were copyright violations, so you should not readd them. To the extent that you can find reliable secondary sources to verify your claims, you may readd those, but you may not readd original research. Please take the time to read the policies I’ve linked as well as WP:BLP to ensure your work complies with policy. Innisfree987 (talk) 05:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Those images were specifically transformed by me as per fair use, and there was no copyright attached. The original sources are public and visible on google at any time. My question here would be, therefore, what the hell are you even talking about? And since we're at it, stop this crypto-bullyism of sending unrequired tutorial link tyvm. Alves Stargazer (talk) 11:48, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- The removal was appropriate and in accordance with policy. The images were deleted at Wikimedia Commons because they were copyright violations, so you should not readd them. To the extent that you can find reliable secondary sources to verify your claims, you may readd those, but you may not readd original research. Please take the time to read the policies I’ve linked as well as WP:BLP to ensure your work complies with policy. Innisfree987 (talk) 05:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Contentious topic alert
edit 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. TarnishedPathtalk 02:02, 12 October 2024 (UTC)