Welcome! edit

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions so far. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

Here are some links to pages you may find useful:

You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but if you wish to acquire additional privileges, you can simply create a named account. It's free, requires no personal information, and lets you:

Note that in order for the first three features to be available, you must have had an account for a certain number of days and made a certain number of edits.

If you edit without using a named account, your IP address (205.148.51.41) is used to identify you instead.

I hope that you, as a Wikipedian, decide to continue contributing to our project: an encyclopedia of human knowledge that anyone can edit. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. We also have an intuitive guide on editing if you're interested. By the way, please make sure to sign and date your talk page comments with four tildes (~~~~).

Happy editing! Aboutmovies (talk) 23:37, 9 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Dew point now part of Weather box edit

I added dew point parameters to {{Weather box}}, so you don't need to add a separate table. See Sequoia National Park#Climate for an example of usage. —hike395 (talk) 09:15, 20 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

July 2019 edit

  Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Wellfleet, Massachusetts. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

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. Hello- You are engaged in a project to add what I find to be superfluous and long-winded climate info to Cape Cod towns. That is why I reverted your edits. Please discuss issues, don't simply revert back. Eric talk 15:53, 30 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please consider applying edit summaries; thank you. edit

  Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing →   Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(become old-fashioned!) 20:19, 26 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

December 2019 edit

  Hello, I'm CLCStudent. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to California State Legislature have been undone because they 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 help desk. Thanks. CLCStudent (talk) 14:23, 2 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

  Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Please don't do that "No." thing with the small underlined 'o'. It's not the Wikipedia way. Feline Hymnic (talk) 15:38, 7 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

Please define "unconstructive." Nothing has been vandalized, removed or rewritten. This is merely a formatting issue whose goal is consistency, some Wikipedia sorely lacks. Please provide links showing exactly and precisely what the Wikipedia way is. No. is the most frequently used version I have seen. number or # is poor English formatting and hints at journalistic laziness. has been seen in quite a few articles and is more formal. Please define where "№" would be appropriate.205.148.51.41 (talk) 14:36, 9 December 2019 (UTC)Reply
(talk page stalker)
(Hi, I'm Patrick, the editor who suggested that you consider using edit summaries (see template above). Other editors, such as Feline Hymnic (above), are also attempting to assist you.)
I saw your response (immediately above) and, hoping it helps a little more, please know that the appropriate Wikipedia guideline on its use of the number sign is documented in the Manual of Style, at MOS:NUMBERSIGN. Thank you for adhering to policies and guidelines, and I hope you will find the Welcome template useful.
With kind regards;
Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(become old-fashioned!) 19:59, 9 December 2019 (UTC)Reply
P.S.: You seem to aspire to improve our encyclopedia; so, why not create an account?
Hello Feline Hymnic and Pdebee.. Thank you kindly for providing this link - MOS:NUMBERSIGN. This helps immensely. As to creating an account, I am not interested in dealing with abusive users like JG66 who regularly engage in WP:RUDE, WP:HA, WP:PA, WP:BITE and, most acutely, WP:OWN behavior. I do not edit regularly enough to create an account. Perhaps in the future. Cheers...205.148.51.41 (talk) 16:21, 3 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
Dear colleague;
Thank you for your feedback, and for your consistent and helpful adoption of 'No.', per MOS:NUMBERSIGN. I hope you will be able to work harmoniously with fellow editors. We are all on a learning curve and should aim to help each other honestly, constructively and with equanimity. I wish you well in all your projects here, whether as an IP user or a registered editor in the future; the benefits of the latter are well documented.
In the mean time, please don't forget to provide meaningful edit summaries, as suggested above. If it helps, here are some examples of my own approach; thank you very much for your consideration.
With kind regards; Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(become old-fashioned!) 18:00, 3 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, I'm Suneye1. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Dear Prudence have been undone because they 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 help desk. Thanks. Sun eye 1 (talk) 14:30, 9 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

  Please do not use styles that are unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Rain (Beatles song). There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you. freshacconci (✉) 19:17, 9 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Cary Grant edit

Hi, I have reverted your addition of an infobox to Cary Grant. The presence or otherwise of an infobox in that article has been subject to protracted, controversial discussion and the current consensus is that it should not have an infobox. If you feel that this is incorrect you should discuss that matter at the article talk page. I note that there is a comment to that effect in the article text which you deleted when adding the infobox. Best wishes, Wham2001 (talk) 19:09, 13 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

  • Read it. There was no consensus, absurd considering every celebrity of both minimal and significant importance has an infobox; there is no logical reason for this entry to conspicuously not have one. Either all actors have their infoboxes removed or missing ones have them added.205.148.51.41 (talk) 19:35, 13 December 2019 (UTC)Reply
  • The discussion closed as no consensus to add an infobox, which is not the same thing. Most articles in Wikipedia do indeed have infoboxes; this one does not. I suggest that you heed the warning from Favonian in the section below. Wham2001 (talk) 20:00, 13 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

December 2019 edit

  Hello, I'm Mdaniels5757. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Three Little Sew and Sews—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 Help desk. Thanks. Mdaniels5757 (talk) 16:48, 24 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

Sorry. Error has been correct. Cheers. 205.148.51.41 (talk) 16:23, 3 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

February 2020 edit

  Hello, I'm CLCStudent. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Tyler Seguin have been undone because they 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 help desk. Thanks. CLCStudent (talk) 14:21, 3 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

  Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Tyler Seguin. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Red Phoenix talk 15:24, 3 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

  Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. EdJF (talk) 17:49, 3 February 2020 (UTC)Reply