User talk:Wickych

October 2017

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Banana Fish, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. —Farix (t | c) 12:40, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Banana Fish. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. —Farix (t | c) 14:23, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Could you please stop quickly casually reverting my edits, contributions before conversation? I'll leave you a message to your comments later. I'm not always active on messaging here in Wikipedia, by the way. Why don't you get calm and wait for my opinion? Thanks. Wickych (talk) 15:31, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Banana Fish, you may be blocked from editing. —Farix (t | c) 22:03, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fist of all, I'm disappointed that you've continued quick reversions even after my message above, which I wrote to avoid a further edit war for everyone related to the page including you.

And I can't believe that after the reversion, you did additional deletion/reversion of all of genres contributed by others which had remained for more than a decade.

Then you're threatening saying "You may be blocked" me into foregoing a contribution? I don't know why you are so offensive and have a desire for quick and persistant and deletion/reversion. You could have had a conversation at the note of the page and other before deleting all of genres. I suggest you should do a reversion more carefully and have a conversation before an attempt at it and look over policies and guidelines, not only the original research part. --Wickych (talk) 06:10, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (October 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by David.moreno72 was:

We're sorry, but we cannot accept blank submissions. Please consider submitting to Wikipedia:Requested articles instead. If in fact you did include text within the article, but it isn't showing, please make sure that any extra text above your entry is removed, as it may be causing it to hide and not be shown to the reviewer.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Wickych/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

David.moreno72 13:00, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Wickych, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! David.moreno72 13:00, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't know what is sandbox and just tested and posted just "1" there to determine the time used in English Wikipedia. I'll check what's sandbox later. I could know the standard time here, by the way:) Thank you.--Wickych (talk) 13:17, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Death Note. 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 notice boards.
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. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. —Farix (t | c) 19:06, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]