User talk:Skye5515

January 2022

Hello, I'm Sea Cow. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to LGBT rights in South Korea have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Please read WP:SCMP. Sea Cow (talk) 19:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Skye5515! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at LGBT rights in South Korea that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. David Biddulph (talk) 20:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Skye5515! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Content dispute in "LGBT Rights in South Korea", has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Transgender genocide

Hi Skye5515. I had to remove the second part of your addition to Transgender genocide. The problem was that you were interpreting the primary source by implying its relevance the the article topic without a Reliable Source demonstrating that relevance. Don't get me wrong; I think you are 100% correct about that relevance but we can't have your interpretation without allowing other people to argue the exact opposite using pretty much the same sources. If you can find a Reliable Source explicitly making that connection then it would be fine to put it back in using that source to support it. BTW, the first part of what you added was fine so please don't think that I am saying that you made a bad edit. DanielRigal (talk) 17:49, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, no, I get it, kinda expected this Skye5515 (talk) 21:37, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]