213.205.194.243

October 2015

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Joe Hart because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Materialscientist (talk) 21:44, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

March 2016

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Scott Mills has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Scott Mills was changed by 213.205.194.243 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.889759 on 2016-03-04T10:27:14+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 10:27, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Welcome to Wikipedia! Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Chuck Feeney did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:22, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

September 2017

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Milton Keynes— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:41, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

References

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Remember that when adding content about health, please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations (There are several kinds of sources that discuss health: here is how the community classifies them and uses them). WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a built-in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:43, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

June 2018

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Critical thinking, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. 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. Your view should be backed by references, or else it doesnt count Daiyusha (talk) 12:47, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

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

St Scholastica Day riot

Hi, thanks for fixing the link on the new source I added on St Scholastica Day riot. I've reverted a couple of the changes you made, though: the publisher and location of the publisher both seem to be "Oxford" (presumably the University Press, though that's not stated explicitly so I can't include it), and the convention for other sources seems to be include subtitles, even if they are rather long. If you want to discuss removing them again, feel free to start a discussion on the article's talk page. Thanks! YorkshireLad  ✿  ^(talk) 11:44, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Wrong on both counts and reverted. 213.205.194.243 (talk) 11:47, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

I've replied to your post on the article's talk page. YorkshireLad  ✿  ^(talk) 12:42, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

October 2021

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Gunny sack—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. Materialscientist (talk) 11:34, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

---