User talk:Heloeheod34

Welcome!

Hello, Heloeheod34, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Introduction tutorial
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Introduction to referencing
Help pages
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

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 personal help ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:36, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Block notice

You have been blocked from editing Shola Mos-Shogbamimu for a period of 72 hours for edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule. 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 at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/sholamos-shogbamimu_my-heart-its-ten-years-today-that-morning-activity-6885102886322282496-k1UT/ source is directly from her. Her father was a PRINCE, deal with. Heloeheod34 (talk) 19:32, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Heloeheod34 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here Heloeheod34 (talk) 19:28, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You are blocked for violating WP:EW and WP:3RR but don't address this in your unblock request. Yamla (talk) 19:36, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

simply adding the name of her father is who was a Prince and getting blocked is ridiculous. Source is from her! what more do you need https://www.linkedin.com/posts/sholamos-shogbamimu_my-heart-its-ten-years-today-that-morning-activity-6885102886322282496-k1UT/ Heloeheod34 (talk) 19:28, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's not why you were blocked. Again, you were blocked for WP:editwarring. And LinkedIn is not a WP:reliable source unconnected with the subject Thanks-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:19, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Hello, I'm Yoshi24517. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to User:Yamla—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Yoshi24517 (Chat) (Online) 19:39, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for abuse of editing privileges. 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 at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

(block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

UTRS appeal #73262

is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:15, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Change you made to the page Catherine, Princess of Wales

The recent edits you made to the page Catherine, Princess of Wales were not fully correct. While I appreciate the fact that you helped make the sentence more accurate and relevant, I would advise you to use shorter sentences when available and avoid using longer pages. Also please leave a message on the talk page or provide a clear and relevant edit summary before making future edit changes to semi protected pages such as these. I have corrected the sentence and made it shorter, neater and accurate now. Thank you MSincccc (talk) 10:37, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Where is Kate? for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Where is Kate? is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Where is Kate? (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 11:43, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page Move Notification

Hello @Heloeheod34, your document Lady Lucan has been moved to the draft because it was not ready to be integrated into the main space of the encyclopedia. SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 19:11, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2024

Hello, I'm SparklingBlueMoon. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please source the article Lady Lucan, as it stands the article may be deleted or moved to draft, when a page is moved to draft please do not move or recreate it yourself without the reviewer's advice. SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 19:16, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help, I have begun to add references Heloeheod34 (talk) 19:20, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Wingfield, 4th Viscount Powerscourt moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Richard Wingfield, 4th Viscount Powerscourt. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:12, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]