As requested in a message you have removed, please continue to find and undo edits such as this and this. Thanks, Certes (talk) 22:09, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To add on to the above, please be aware of the special sanctions that Wikipedia has on the following topics that may be related:

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in the Uyghur genocide. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may impose sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Thank you,

— Mikehawk10 (talk) 00:06, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Everything that had to do with it was

A total accident. EthanGaming7640 (talk) 01:41, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - I see that you've been making grammar corrections to various pages, presumably (based purely on the edit summaries) with the assistance of a tool such as LanguageTool. Grammar and spelling clean-up is in general very much appreciated, but can I ask you to take care to ensure that the changes don't change the meaning of the text. This is particularly important on Wikipedia policy pages (e.g. here) - the text of policies has been developed through an extensive consensus process, and even minor grammar changes can change the meaning from what that consensus intended. Automated grammar fixes without careful human review are best avoided, as they would probably fall foul of our policy on bot-like editing - I'd recommend looking at participating in something like the Guild of Copy Editors instead (have a look at the 'New copy editors' section). Thanks! firefly ( t · c ) 15:26, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for the info! (And yes, I do copy and paste the edit summaries.) EthanGaming7640 (talk) 15:29, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No worries - feel free to ask me if you've got any questions, I'll keep this page watchlisted so you can just reply here. firefly ( t · c ) 15:33, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just a comment about the edit summaries: I don't think directly pasting the software messages with no other explanation is a good idea. People initially assume a human wrote them, and that can sometimes give them a dogmatic or patronising tone which I'm sure you don't intend. (That applies especially with "rules" which vary between countries or publishers: the software might be trying to apply an American convention to an article which consistently uses the British one, for example. Good copy-editing will make it consistent within the article, not insist on one or the other.) It might be better to use something like punctuation as suggested by LanguageTool or whatever. Musiconeologist (talk) 17:51, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi, Ethan. I've had to revert a number of your edits, mostly to projectspace (policy/etc.) pages, because they violated various aspects of our [[MOS:|Manual of Style]]. A number went against our rule on curly quotes, one added an incorrect comma, and one made a significant change to an explanatory supplement's meaning ("consensus" → "general consensus" [which is less strong than a regular consensus]) without indicating that it was doing so. I also reverted one edit that added a selfref hatnote to WP:ME at Me; MOS:SELFREF is a bit vaguer on these things, but I tend to remove any such hatnotes that aren't terms our readers or brand-new editors are likely to be using. (So the hatnote at AFD, for instance, I wouldn't remove, because "AFD" is an acronym a brand-new editor might hear out of context.) I appreciate your enthusiasm, but please familiarize yourself better with [[MOS:|the Manual of Style]] and the information at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors before continuing to make copy-edits. I'd also encourage you to focus more on copy-editing articles than copy-editing projectspace pages. It's too easy to accidentally make a change that modifies the meaning of a policy/guideline/essay, unless you're very familiar with what the page in question means. Thanks, and happy editing. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 21:15, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi EthanGaming7640, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you have any questions, you can get help from experienced editors at the Teahouse. Happy editing! CapnZapp (talk) 12:43, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. -- ferret (talk) 20:15, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop using LanguageTool and other automated grammar tools on Wikipedia. You've received several well meaning warnings and notices about this already, and especially in regards to using it against Policies and Guidelines. You continue to do so, despite the notices/warnings.

Automated grammar tools are generally not compatible with Wiki syntax or Wiki Manual of Style, and it's very disruptive for other users to have to review and revert automated editing, even if it's being done "by hand" through copy and pasting.

If you continue to ignore these warnings, you may be blocked to prevent further disruption. -- ferret (talk) 20:16, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Please can you slow down with the short description additions, and make sure that you're checking each addition carefully? We don't display wikidata descriptions by default for a reason, because they're fairly rubbish and prone to vandalism. Have you read the guidance at Wikipedia:Short description?

This addition appears to have imported vandalism/a poor translation from wikidata [1], a better description would be something like "Mongolian musical instrument". Single word descriptions like "City" [2], "Family" [3], "battle" [4], "Organization" [5] [6] or "System" [7] are also unsuitable as short descriptions - a short description should contain slightly more information than that. Instead of "System" something like "United States Air Force telecommunication network" would be a much better short description. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 13:49, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per Help:Minor edit: "A check to the minor edit box signifies that only superficial differences exist between the current and previous versions. Examples include typographical corrections, corrections of minor formatting errors, and reversion of obvious vandalism." Removing a template does not seem to fit within this limitatioon. Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 17:04, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect James while John had a better effect on the teacher. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 11#James while John had a better effect on the teacher until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 15:38, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your edit at the above, please do not correct typos in other users' posts on talkpages. See WP:TPO for more information. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 16:47, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ethan - please stop making automated grammar fixes to Wikipedia policies. I’ve reverted your most recent change as it changed the capitalisation of terms that are capitalised on Wikipedia as the names of specific venues. This is why automated correction tools used without strong knowledge of WP are a bad idea, as was mentioned above. firefly ( t · c ) 20:19, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That had nothing to do with LanguageTool EthanGaming7640 (talk) 20:20, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add {{Redirect category shell}} to a bunch of single-rcat redirects. This clogged by watchlist and did not improve the redirect. Thank you. ― Qwerfjkltalk 09:23, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Or at least DRASTICALLY cut it down?

I didn't come to this article to read the complete history of sponge cake in 16th century Spain or whatever. It's not central to this article, and would be better suited for sponge cake in general, or whatever. 72.76.95.136 (talk) 16:47, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to Help:Minor edit, examples of minor edits include "typographical corrections, corrections of minor formatting errors, and reversion of obvious vandalism." You can find examples of "major" edits here. Not sure? Help:Minor edit instructs: "if you are in doubt about whether an edit is minor or not, it is always safer not to mark it as minor." (In case you're curious, this edit is the one that prompted me to write.) Butwhatdoiknow (talk)

Ah thanks, I had a feeling something like that existed but wasn‘t sure where to find it. JediMasterMacaroni^(Talk) 19:50, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]