Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page University of Michigan, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:46, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, H-eros-mus-tri-se. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. GuardianH (talk) 17:21, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

H-eros-mus-tri-se Do you have any connection with the University of Michigan? GuardianH (talk) 19:54, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is your definition of "connection"? Do you mean I got paid for editing? Then, no. H-eros-mus-tri-se (talk) 00:22, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@H-eros-mus-tri-se Do you have any connection to the university that may prompt a conflict of interest? A connection that would influence your editing in any way less than objective — i.e., to paint the university in a favorable or promotional manner. GuardianH (talk) 05:31, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, in the case of financial conflict of interest. H-eros-mus-tri-se (talk) 21:04, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I never asked about a financial conflict of interest, just any conflict of interest. Do you have any conflict of interest? @H-eros-mus-tri-se GuardianH (talk) 02:12, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a vague question. Be specific. Everything is connected to everything else with overlapping interests. If you are seeking meaningless answers, my response would be "NO." H-eros-mus-tri-se (talk) 07:27, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stop dancing around the question. Do you have a conflict of interest with the University of Michigan? ElKevbo (talk) 22:59, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no H-eros-mus-tri-se (talk) 23:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that one or more recent edit(s) you made did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! ElKevbo (talk) 22:59, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of University of Michigan business alumni, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page First State Bank. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited University of Michigan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alumni Field.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello H-eros-mus-tri-se! Your additions to University of Michigan–Dearborn have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it's important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:

• Limited quotation: You may only copy or translate a small portion of a source. Any direct quotations must be enclosed in double quotation marks (") and properly cited using an inline citation. More information is available on the non-free content page. To learn how to cite a source, see Help:Referencing for beginners.
• Paraphrasing: Beyond limited quotations, you are required to put all information in your own words. Following the source's wording too closely can lead to copyright issues and is not permitted; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when paraphrasing, you must still cite your sources as appropriate.
• Image use guidelines: In most scenarios, only freely licensed or public domain images may be used and these should be uploaded to our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. In some scenarios, non-freely copyrighted content can be used if they meet all ten of our non-free content criteria; Wikipedia:Plain and simple non-free content guide may help with determining a file's eligibility.
• Copyrighted material donation: If you hold the copyright to the content you want to copy, or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license the text for publication here. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Copying and translation within Wikipedia: Wikipedia articles can be copied or translated, however they must have proper attribution in accordance with Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. For translation, see Help:Translation § License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 22:28, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Julie Biteen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nathan Lewis.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved content from History of the University of Michigan into University of Michigan. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content (here or elsewhere), Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. -- mikeblas (talk) 21:50, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I’d like to address a recurring issue with your edits to the University of Michigan article.

1. Overuse of primary sources:
From the beginning, much of the article has relied heavily on primary sources published by the university itself (e.g., catalogs, by-laws, registers). While Wikipedia does not prohibit primary sources, the guideline at WP:PRIMARY makes it clear that they must be used with great caution, and articles on universities should primarily be based on independent, secondary sources that provide analysis and context. Please stop adding more university-published primary sources as references — this practice makes the article read like institutional self-promotion rather than an encyclopedic entry.

2. Misuse of Further reading:
Your recent edits to the Further reading section have introduced material that is not appropriate under Wikipedia:Further reading. Specifically:
+ Topicality: “A large part, if not all, of the work should be directly about the subject of the article.” Works such as General by-laws, registers, and newsletters are administrative documents, not scholarly works about the university. Reliable: “Preference is normally given to high-quality reliable sources.” Primary records from the 19th century and internal regulations are not high-quality secondary sources.
+ Balanced: “Works named in this section should present a neutral view of the subject.” Adding children’s books (e.g., University of Michigan 101) clearly fails this requirement.
+ Limited: “Wikipedia is not a catalogue of all existing works… preference should normally be given to notable works over non-notable works.” A large dump of archival primary documents clutters the section and violates this principle.
===> Further reading is intended for secondary, scholarly, high-quality works that readers can consult for deeper understanding. Primary administrative records and children’s books simply do not fit.

In addition, moving two Further reading items into the Bibliography section is also incorrect. Per WP:BIBLIOGRAPHY, that section is reserved for works actually used to build the article’s content, not for general background reading.

3. Structure:
You also created unnecessary sub-sections (“Primary sources,” “For young readers,” “Scholarly studies”), which is not the standard layout. Per guideline: “The Further reading section of an article contains a bulleted list of a reasonable number of works… The section is one of the optional standard appendices and footers. These appear in a defined order at the bottom of the article.” Your restructuring departs from this standard and makes the section messy.

👉 In short:
+ Please stop adding new university-published primary sources as references unless there are no alternative secondary sources available.
+ Remove non-appropriate works (administrative records, children’s books) from Further reading.
+ Restore Further reading to a simple, clean bulleted list of notable, secondary, scholarly works.

If the article continues to rely so heavily on university-published primary sources, it risks being tagged for overuse of primary sources. Even if I do not place such a maintenance tag, at some point another editor will — because this problem is very visible in the current sourcing. That is not the direction we want a Featured-quality university article to go.

You may want to take a look at how other high-quality articles (for example, Normandy landings) handle their Bibliography and Further reading sections. Those articles rely on independent, secondary scholarly works, presented cleanly in a bulleted list. That model could easily be followed here to improve sourcing and organization. CalCoWSpiBudSu (talk) 16:18, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I understand you may have a personal attachment to the university, but if the article is not built according to guidelines it will only create problems later. Even when I added well-sourced secondary references, they were still challenged due to long-standing editorial disputes and bias. That is why it is important to keep this section strictly aligned with policy. CalCoWSpiBudSu (talk) 16:37, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the information. The article certainly requires the expertise of experienced editors to enhance its overall quality. H-eros-mus-tri-se (talk) 06:12, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of University of Michigan business alumni, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Henry Ward and Jeff Lawson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:59, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of University of Michigan faculty and staff, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Robson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of University of Michigan business alumni, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Henry Ward and Jeff Lawson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to History of the University of Michigan has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:54, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I treated the page as a sandbox and will rewrite it shortly. I will be more cautious. Thank you. H-eros-mus-tri-se (talk) 06:15, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of the University of Michigan, a link pointing to the disambiguation page High Mass was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:56, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]