User talk:BigContributor

Welcome![edit]

Hello, BigContributor, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Unbroken Chain (talk) 19:41, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and I should like to add my welcome to that given above by Unbroken Chain. I see that you restored a proposed deletion (PROD) notice to the article Northern Reflections after it had been removed. "Proposed deletion" is only for totally uncontroversial deletion proposals, and if anyone contests the proposal by removing the notice then it is not uncontroversial, so Wikipedia policy is that the notice may not be restored. There are two other possible ways to suggest deletion:

You may nominate the article for speedy deletion if you think that there is no plausible indication that the business which is the subject of the article is significant. To do that, add {{Db-a7}} to the top of the page, since it is speedy deletion criterion A7 which applies to businesses without indication of significance.
You may start a deletion discussion, as describes at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Unfortunately the procedure described there is rather complicated, and most editors new to the process find it confusing. (I certainly did when I first used it.) However, it is possible to make the process far simpler and easier by installing "Twinkle", which is a set of tools which largely automate various tasks. You can see how to do that at Wikipedia:Twinkle. JBW (talk) 21:20, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Northern Reflections[edit]

Please see wp:proposed deletion (PROD). Once it is removed, it may not be re-added. See WP:DEPROD. Use a wp:article for deletion instead.

February 2022[edit]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to northern Reflections, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Adakiko (talk) 12:15, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I put some time and trouble into writing my message above, in an attempt to help you in connection with deletion processes. You chose to ignore what I wrote, and restored the proposed deletion notice again. Doing so is a complete waste of your time, because no administrator will delete an article on the basis of a proposed deletion notice which has been removed and restored. JBW (talk) 12:32, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at northern Reflections. 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. Adakiko (talk) 12:38, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring[edit]

Your recent editing history at Northern Reflections shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Adakiko (talk) 12:39, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistent disruptive editing. The fact that you have continued in the same way despite being informed why what you have been doing is futile makes me wonder whether it may be deliberate trolling rather than misunderstanding. Anyway, whatever the reason for your persistent disruption, take warning that if you continue in the same way after this block is over then you are likely to be blocked for mush longer. I hope that won't happen. 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 ~~~~}}. JBW (talk) 23:01, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have just seen the message you posted at User talk:Phil Bridger, where you wrote "I understand that we have different attitudes towards Proposed deletion..." i am surprised that after receiving the above messages you have not realised that it is not a matter of individual editors' personal attitudes, it is a matter of Wikipedia policy. JBW (talk) 23:07, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW: That addition to Phil Bridger's talk page by BigC appears copy/pasted from a 6 Jan 2022 comment by Liz from the top of the same section. Adakiko (talk) 06:26, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]