User talk:BottleOfChocolateMilk

BottleOfChocolateMilk, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi BottleOfChocolateMilk! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cordless Larry (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Film notability and sourcing

Hi! I wanted to drop you a note about film notability and sourcing. I noted that you had requested that an article be restored at REFUND, however I couldn't find any sourcing to show that the film exists or passes WP:NFILM. I took a look at some of the other articles you'd edited and I wanted to kind of give you an overview of sourcing and notability for films (and articles in general).

Basically, films can only pass NFILM if they have coverage in independent and reliable sources. What counts as a reliable source is fairly narrow when it comes to Wikipedia, honestly. IMDb is not considered to be a reliable source on Wikipedia because anyone can add and edit a listing on there and at most, it's considered to be a routine database listing. E-commerce sites like Amazon are also not considered to be reliable but are especially something to avoid placing on an article because e-commerce sites are seen as inherently promotional since their primary goal is to sell you something. Any other goal is pretty much secondary to that main goal. Reviews can count towards notability, but only specific types of reviews. Ratings on IMDb and audience ratings on Rotten Tomatoes does not count towards notability since anyone can create an account on that site and leave a rating, so the only time that something like that should be mentioned in an article at all would be in cases like Kirk Cameron's Saving Christmas. (He tried to get his fans to upvote the movie on Rotten Tomatoes, only for it to backfire hilariously.)

So what can be used? Reviews in major newspapers can be used, as can some reviews in select film websites. Since you focus on horror, the main websites that tend to be usable are Rue Morgue, Fangoria (their rep has gone down, but they're still generally seen as a RS), Ain't It Cool News (same situation here), HorrorNews.net, Dread Central, JoBlo.com's Arrow in the Head, and Bloody Disgusting. There are some other sites that fall along the RS scale, but these are the biggies. Sad thing is, most of the horror websites out there are seen as self-published sources since the majority of them don't have any sort of overview of their editorial process and don't get frequently used as a source in very reliable sources. The longevity of the site doesn't really make it more reliable on here, unfortunately. (On a side note, have you ever checked out Culture Crypt? It's not seen as a RS on here, much to my sorrow, but I love checking out their reviews since they're honest and fair.)

Now what this means is that if the sourcing isn't out there, the film fails NFILM and shouldn't be on Wikipedia. A film article typically needs about 3-4 sources to really pass notability guidelines and two of those should be reviews. The only time you can get by with less (like two sources) is when those sources claim that the film has achieved something so major that it'd pass on that guideline alone, otherwise it'd be seen to fail notability guidelines. Also, if you have a lot of sources but the only things that you have so far are short announcements that the movie is going to release, that's most likely not going to be enough to pass notability guidelines unless the sources are over a broad period of time and are fairly in-depth.

I hope that none of this discourages you - I just wanted to give you a bit of an overview as to why I didn't restore the article for you. My fear is that it fails notability guidelines and would eventually get deleted anyway. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 21:51, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Neil hansen

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Neil hansen. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Heil Hansen. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Heil Hansen. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Majavah ^(t/c) 06:19, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, BottleOfChocolateMilk

Thank you for creating 2020 West Virginia elections.

User:Lefcentreright, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Please add a lead.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Lefcentreright}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

LefcentrerightDiscuss 16:34, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Bill Wooton moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Bill Wooton, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. JavaHurricane 06:36, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020 United States House of Representatives elections in Indiana, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bloomington and Baron Hill. 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 October 2020 (UTC)

2022 United States Senate election in Florida

Hey I noticed you added a candidate to the declared section that wasn't yet registered in the Florida Department of State register for declared candidates, which you can find here: [1]. If the candidate you added recently declared his candidacy, please give it around a week for the register to be updated. Once he is added on the register, we will add him to the list of declared candidates. Curbon7 (talk) 00:53, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

January 2021

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to 2022 United States Senate election in Florida, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Curbon7 (talk) 17:33, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 30

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2021 New York City mayoral election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eric Adams.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

2021 New York City mayoral election

In regard to this edit, you wrote, "Every Wikipedia election article I've ever seen included a blank results table before the election occurred. There's no reason not to include this now." Have you seen 2017 New York City mayoral election? As seen in this edit, the blank results table wasn't added until the day before the primary. In 2013, the results tables weren't added until after the primary had actually taken place. By contrast, the primary is now more than 4 months away. The reasons not to include the tables now is that (a) they take up a good deal of space without providing any additional information and (b) some of the candidates listed may not even wind up qualifying for the ballot. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 22:39, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Take a look at a few of the pages in this category. I guarantee you that if you look in the revision histories, you'll see blank results tables in most if not all of them, some even added several months in advance of the actual elections. There is clear precedent for doing this. That being said, I really don't care that much and don't feel like getting into a whole debate over this. So if you *really* feel the need to remove the tables for whatever reason, then go ahead.

Disambiguation link notification for February 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2022 Nebraska gubernatorial election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sara Howard.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Bill Wooton

Hello, BottleOfChocolateMilk. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Bill Wooton".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:25, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2022 United States Senate election in North Carolina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mark Walker.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Tables for election articles

Next time you decide to change up the style of election articles in Wikipedia, please be sure to discuss it with the community first and see what the consensus behind such changes is. There are some in this community who clearly disagree with such changes. >:( Love of Corey (talk) 23:36, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Which changes? You are undoing other's work and making changes without consensus, and he reverted them back to how they were previously without consensus. Shadowrvn728 ❯❯❯ Talk 18:05, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

March 2021

Hello, I'm Shadowrvn728. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction, such as your addition to User talk:Love of Corey. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Shadowrvn728 ❯❯❯ Talk 18:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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 noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Toa Nidhiki05 18:38, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Confusion

Hi there! Are you actually a bottle of chocolate milk or are you just playing around because you have got me believing that you are actually somebody’s food or drink. --IamTheAstronomer Talk 05:59, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 20

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2022 Kansas gubernatorial election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Roger Marshall.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:52, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

May 2021

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. Thanks! AllegedlyHuman (talk) 21:31, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

RE: 2022 Florida gubernatorial election

For non-presidential US elections, the established consensus is that we do not have the right to make a judgement of who is and isn't a major candidate, as this raises big neutrality issues. As the election progresses, more of the frivolous candidates will drop out or be disqualified until the primary leaves candidate one on top. Curbon7 (talk) 01:56, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Resilient Barnstar
	Seeing your growth as an editor these past several months has been great. You've really improved tenfold! Curbon7 (talk) 03:38, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

2021 Seattle mayoral election

Candidates have been removed by you from the infobox for the 2021 Seattle Mayoral Election and you have stated the reason that "Only candidates who average 5% or more in polls can be included in the infobox" on July 13 and " this is the policy" on July 15. There is no policy in Wikipedia or the democratic process that only candidates with approval ratings by polls may show up in info boxes, other media, just as there is not a policy that candidates must have a certain approval rating to be on ballots. Your edits based on bias and effect a deliberate attempt to interfere with people choices by limiting their access to information. You are using Wikipedia in an unethical manner. -- laura musikanski.

Your draft article, Draft:Bill Wooton

Hello, BottleOfChocolateMilk. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Bill Wooton".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:32, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2022 Alaska gubernatorial election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mike Dunleavy.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Notice of DS

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.

HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 07:22, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Also please note that the article 2022 New York gubernatorial election is now under a WP:1RR restriction. See the notice at the top of the talk page for details: Talk:2022 New York gubernatorial election. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 08:58, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Notification of RfC

Hello. I'm just letting you know that there is currently a Request for Comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums#RfC about primary candidate photos in election articles since you have made edits like this talking about how such removals would require an RfC. Thanks. —twotwofourtysix^{(My talk page and contributions)} 00:34, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

vandalism?

Vandalism has a very specific definition here, and removing terrible, low quality images you screengrabbed off youtube doesn't meet that definition. See MOS:IMAGEQUALITY for more details on why poor-quality images should not be used, and don't accuse others of vandalism without apparently knowing what that means. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:43, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Please stop adding low-quality images to Wikipedia biographies. Please take a moment to read MOS:IMAGEQUALITY. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:34, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

2022 Vermont House of Representatives election moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, 2022 Vermont House of Representatives election, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. John B123 (talk) 20:49, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

October 2021

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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 noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. All these images/changes, against consensus? User:Toa Nidhiki05, what do you think? Drmies (talk) 19:40, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Drmies, there's been a pretty wide debate over adding images to all election articles. BottleOfChocolateMilk has taken it upon himself to upload a slew of generally low-quality images and add them in galleries to every election article under the sun, when there's no consensus to do so and the benefit is negligible at best. I think it would be best if these sections were generally removed, or at least if BottleOfChocolateMilk would stop adding them without input from the applicable WikiProject. Many of these images are of horrendously poor quality. Toa Nidhiki05 19:42, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

That's what I thought I saw. Bottle, you have to stop this. If anyone reverts you, that is their good right: you are editing against consensus. Please don't go any further--discuss the matter. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 19:45, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Per WP:OTHERCONTENT, you can't remove something on the basis of "well other pages don't do this," so I don't think the argument that you need consensus holds very much weight. And Drmies, I started a discussion on the North Carolina page and nobody cared. If every decision on Wikipedia required a drawn-out discussion, there would never be any changes on Wikipedia. I seriously don't know what you expect me to do here. If it's their "good right" to revert me is it not my "good right" to do the exact same thing? Toa Nidhiki05, you are the only person objecting to these. None of the thousands of other editors who look at these pages every day seem to object. It really seems like you have a personal bias against these galleries and are using this consensus thing as an excuse; whenever you remove one of these your edit summary is always "There is no need for a photo gallery," not "There is no consensus for this." Once again, there is literally nothing for me to do. One random person can just come along and say "this is wrong" and if I try to undo it then suddenly I'm being "disruptive." And if I try to start a discussion then nobody even replies to it, probably because nobody editing these pages has any strong opinions on the galleries besides Toa Nidhiki05. Is that not a tacit consensus in and of itself? I mean that's the closest we're going to get to a consensus on this because like I said, when I tried to make a discussion, nobody responded. Again, if we were operating under your rules then there would never be any changes made to Wikipedia. One person could just come along and say "um no, I have taken it upon myself to decide this is bad, if you want to do this you need to start a discussion. And if nobody replies to that discussion or even remotely cares then sorry bud, there's nothing you can do. And don't you dare undo my undo because that's disruptive." Bottom line: we don't need consensus for this, we can't possibly get consensus because we three seem to be the only people who care about the galleries, and we kind of have consensus already, because these galleries have existed for months and nobody has removed them besides Toa Nidhiki05. I really don't feel like getting into another argument over pictures on the screen, so if you really feel as though one or two rows of pictures destroys the entire quality of these pages, then go ahead and remove them. I just hope that you'll apply the same logic to everyone else and remove every section on those pages that didn't get explicit consensus beforehand. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 20:06, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, but this paragraph is way too long. I see your first argument, and consensus always holds weight. I see your conclusion and it says you won't fight over it, so that's good. Yes, I try to apply the same logic everywhere, but "remove every section that didn't get explicit consensus beforehand, sorry, but that's BS, and that is not what we are saying at all. You changed things, you get reverted, you change em back, you get reverted again--don't be surprised if that raises eyebrows. I saw Talk:2022 United States Senate election in North Carolina, and Toa Nidhiki told you to discuss that on the WikiProject page, which is much more visible than one little local page, but you didn't. And what you are doing here, this yelling, that is not OK, ever. If Toa Nidhiki wants to revert all of those changes, they have my blessing. Oh, I saw "random editor"--they're not random, not at all. Drmies (talk) 21:17, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

lmfao so you're telling me that consensus is important and discussion is king but can't take 1 minute to read a paragraph? Got it. And sorry for typing in all caps at them, I guess? Really trying not be get sarcastic here but my god you are just being so dramatic about this. It's pixels on a screen, my guy. Again, not going to keep arguing, so I guess we're done here. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 21:23, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm not your guy. You can't write on a website if you don't know how to write on the internet, and this also happens to be a collaborative project, so insulting other editors is really the last thing you should do. User:Magnolia677, I saw this and I think you were being diplomatic: that picture is not just low quality, it's absolutely horrible. Drmies (talk) 21:52, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Okay Drmies, I know I said I wasn't going to argue about this, but I think I actually found something that supports my case. Are you familiar with something on Wikipedia called the "CD rule"? BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 22:08, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:46, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 2023 Denver mayoral election

The article 2023 Denver mayoral election has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This event is two years in the future. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. WP:TOOSOON applies.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Whiteguru (talk) 20:54, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2022 United States House of Representatives elections in Texas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Burgess.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:2022 Vermont House of Representatives election

Hello, BottleOfChocolateMilk. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2022 Vermont House of Representatives election, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:01, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:2022 Vermont House of Representatives election

Hello, BottleOfChocolateMilk. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "2022 Vermont House of Representatives election".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:49, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

May 2022

Please do not add or change content, as you did at 2022 United States Senate election in Pennsylvania, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 00:58, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, BottleOfChocolateMilk

Thank you for creating 2023 Memphis mayoral election.

User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:38, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, BottleOfChocolateMilk

Thank you for creating 2022 Long Beach, California mayoral election.

User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 01:09, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, BottleOfChocolateMilk

Thank you for creating Burlington, Vermont City Council.

User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 13:50, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

July 2022

Hello. I wanted to let you know that in your recent contributions, you seemed to act as if you were the owner of a page. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. This means that editors do not own articles, including ones they create, and should respect the work of their fellow contributors. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Toa Nidhiki05 23:46, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Surreal Barnstar
	For breaking the record for most reverts of a single user in a single hour Toa Nidhiki05 00:37, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Chair Doug Chaffee Picture

Hello BottleOfChocolateMilk&action thank you for adding Chair Chaffee a Picture its been so long with out a picture.2603:8001:2902:64F4:845:C700:AEA3:EC04 (talk) 20:31, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

love your article about progressives

User:BottleOfChocolateMilk/2022 Progressives

Take a gander at geoff Young any suggested improvements?

Again great article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.254.126.215 (talk) 20:03, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;"		style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;"	The Surreal Barnstar
style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;"	For your progressive ♥ article

🏳

Copyright violation

Your edit to Robert Norris (Vermont politician) 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 more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. 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. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:06, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Geoff Young

An article you contributed to Geoff Young is now up for deletion. 2A00:1FA0:8C0:42F6:0:5E:9652:5E01 (talk) 10:09, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Endorsements edit

Thank you for valuing the sourcing of endorsements on the Nebraska Congressional Districts elections for 2022 page. Because I was limited in space, I wanted to give you further context about my Undo.

I found you eliminated multiple sources in the same edit. This makes it really hard to go through and check the validity of each source, as well as to find secondary sourcing when needed. This is a pretty important issue for an encyclopedia: did you research to find other sourcing before making this edit? If you did, then thank you, and try to make those edits individually (ie. delete all the endorsements for Source A and state why Source A is unsatisfactory and post that edit. Then, delete all the endorsements for Source B and state why Source B is unsatisfactory and post that edit. Etc.). If you didn't, please try to in the future.

Secondly, there were edits made to phrasing and grammar mixed in, at least (there were so many edits, I did not try to find other confounding edits). This is especially unhelpful because somebody would need to undo your phrasing in addition to the rest of your edits if they disagreed and sometimes (I am not accusing you of this) bad actors can "sneak in" nefarious edits amongst other edits which look like good faith changes. Grenvilledodge (talk) 19:55, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

ANI discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jolly1253 (talk) 13:33, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Re: your revert

Hello.

You did this revert with the following edit summary: "That doesn't really make sense, their articles were titled that way partially to distinguish them from other people with the same name. Why would you use a middle initial for only some people on a page?".

There are several errors in this rationale.

First, if someone is generally known as Anthony Brown, and there is a need for disambiguation (which there is in this case), you don't throw in a middle initial unless that is how he is known. You add a disambiguator – i.e. to Anthony Brown (politician). If there is a need to further disambiguate (which there is), it should be Anthony Brown (Maryland politician).

See WP:COMMONNAME, section Parenthetical disambiguation ("Adding a disambiguating term in parentheses after the ambiguous name is Wikipedia's standard disambiguation technique when none of the other solutions lead to an optimal article title."), and WP:Middle names, section Middle names and initials ("Adding given names, or their abbreviations, merely for disambiguation purposes (if that format of the name is not commonly used to refer to the person) is not advised.").

Second, one should not use middle initials (or conceal them by piping) for different persons for consistency reasons throughout an article. The consistency Wikpedia uses is the WP:COMMONNAME consistency: people are referred to by their common name in Wikipedia. If one person is known as John H. Doe and another person is known Charlie Johnson, that's not a problem.

It appears to me that several of the articles on people named (and linked) in the above article need to be moved.

Cheers.

HandsomeFella (talk) 18:23, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Ways to improve 2023 Tucson mayoral election

Hello, BottleOfChocolateMilk,

Thank you for creating 2023 Tucson mayoral election.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Hi - whether a previous election is notable or not has no bearing on the assessment of notability of an upcoming election. At this point (October 2022, more than a year from the election) there appear insufficient sources to indicate that the 2023 Tucson mayoral election is notable. There are not sufficient reliable sources in the article to satisfy WP:GNG or WP:EVENTCRIT. (There is no consensus on the reliability of Ballotpedia and that piece does not satisfy SIGCOV) WP:CRYSTAL indicates that articles about almost certain future events are allowed, but that does not mean they are excluded from the requirements to satisfy the GNG. Please add sufficient reliable sourcing to satisfy the GNG before removing the tag. Regards,

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Goldsztajn}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Goldsztajn (talk) 03:39, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Alliancss

Hello. I think you should maybe check the rest of the SF elections as most of them don’t even list a party at all. Bbraxtonlee (talk) 21:34, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Election box TBD

Template:Election box TBD has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:00, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Deprodding of David Brog

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from David Brog, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Freelance-frank (talk) 20:12, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Standard discretionary sanctions notice

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.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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 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.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.

Beccaynr (talk) 20:57, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Gray bar in infoboxes

72.132.8.90, stop removing the gray bar from the infoboxes. There are plenty of pages for nonpartisan elections on Wikipedia that use the gray bar (because GRAY IS LITERALLY THE COLOR FOR NONPARTISAN CANDIDATES AND DOES NOT CORRESPOND TO A POLITICAL PARTY), because it greatly helps the formatting. As I pointed out, having no color bar breaks the District 3 infobox as there is no visual separation between the first and second rows. There is no party listed for anyone anywhere on the page, nobody will assume that the color gray represents one unnamed party everyone is a member of. There is no "confusion" and you can't keep undoing this because "it's confusing because I say so" BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 07:39, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

there no need for nonpartisan color just add the candidates photos is its confusing 74.62.14.52 (talk) 19:04, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

its just best to have the top two like la city has and not worry about colors there really is no point to have color because some people tend to change colors into a political party link as a good faith edit and confused the color with a party 2603:8001:2902:64F4:3582:F61F:F13F:2F39 (talk) 03:01, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Nobody does that. Only you. Literally every other nonpatisan election has the grey boxes. You just seem like you want to have something just because you say so. reppop^talk 21:46, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Also, @BottleOfChocolateMilk:, the IP addresses have done this for MONTHS on end. reppop^talk 21:47, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

An update: Someone else who interacted with them opened an ANI discussion on the user. reppop^talk 06:17, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Colwidth

In regard to this edit, you are correct that the colwidth parameter of Template:Endorsements box does not require the use of "em". However, it is not the case that "adding the "em" breaks it and makes it so there are no columns". Looking at 2024 Republican Party presidential primaries#Endorsements right now, I see that Ron DeSantis has "colwidth=60em" and his endorsements are in 2 columns. Donald Trump has "colwidth=60" and his endorsements are (at least for me) shown in 7 columns. If you have a different size monitor, your experience may vary. If you are seeing something very different from what I am seeing as to DeSantis's and Trump's endorsements, let me know. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 08:09, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

• Metropolitan90 I see five columns on Trump's, not seven. When the "em" is removed I only see one column. Also, on DeSantis's box I only see one column. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 09:35, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

"Thunder Only Happens When It's Raining" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Thunder Only Happens When It's Raining and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 10 § Thunder Only Happens When It's Raining until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. MB 04:17, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

2024 Richmond, Virginia, mayoral election moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, 2024 Richmond, Virginia, mayoral election, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:14, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Original research

Wikipedia:No original research I meant to link this in the edit notes but accidently hit submit first so I'll just link it here. 50.24.123.151 (talk) 07:19, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Six month rule

I noticed you cited a "Six month rule" for Mitch Daniels on the 2023 Indianapolis mayoral election. I have no objection as it seems highly unlikely that Daniels will run in this race. However, I wanted to know if this six month rule was a standard on Wiki since I have never heard of it. Just trying to learn more. Thanks! Grahaml35 (talk) 19:20, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, BottleOfChocolateMilk. Thank you for your work on 2023 Cherokee Nation principal chief election. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hello! Thank you for creating this article. I have marked it as reviewed. I encourage you to write more articles! Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 13:33, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

February 2023

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from one or more pages into another page. 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. — Diannaa (talk) 15:29, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, BottleOfChocolateMilk. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page 2024 United States Senate election in California, 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 {{request edit}} 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. You need to declare if you have a connection to any of the campaigns. In addition, you appear to be connected to the film industry and are removing information about their support for Adam Schiff from this page. 76.6.214.238 (talk) 18:00, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Hey

Special:Diff/1140788425

A user seems to have been trying to leave a message on your talk, but placed it on your user page instead. I removed it from there and just wanted to let you know so that you can respond to it. Best wishes, ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 04:19, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of 2023 Boise mayoral election for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2023 Boise mayoral election is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Boise mayoral election until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Grahaml35 (talk) 14:07, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of 2023 Aurora, Colorado, mayoral election for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2023 Aurora, Colorado, mayoral election is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Aurora, Colorado, mayoral election until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Grahaml35 (talk) 14:20, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Please avert an edit war in 2024 United States Senate election in Michigan article

A new edit to the 2024 United States Senate election in Michigan adds a Democratic candidate and the only supporting citation is that candidate's web site. Without a journalistic or government citation to back up the edit, it was deleted. But that was reverted without adding another supporting citation. Please take a look at the article. Steelbeard1 (talk) 21:03, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

2023 Nashville mayoral election candidate photo table

Hey! Saw the note on the reversion edit from me adding (back; which I didn't even realize that I was the second person to put in a candidate photo table lol), so I thought I'd leave a message on your board to discuss it! While I disagree with the idea that not having half the photos makes it "ugly", admittedly, it does make it look a little incomplete. However, other folks (myself included) are trying to get usable photos for all the candidates soon; for example, I got a photo of Freddie O'Connell tonight. Not to mention, keeping the spots open for others to upload photos leads to other people uploading photos they have of the candidates. Let me know what you think! :) TrentBenge (talk) 04:42, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of 2023 Des Moines mayoral election for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2023 Des Moines mayoral election is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Des Moines mayoral election until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Grahaml35 (talk) 00:07, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of 2023 Kansas City mayoral election for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2023 Kansas City mayoral election is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Kansas City mayoral election until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Grahaml35 (talk) 00:32, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of 2023 Savannah mayoral election for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2023 Savannah mayoral election is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Savannah mayoral election until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Grahaml35 (talk) 05:09, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of 2023 Portland, Maine mayoral election for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2023 Portland, Maine mayoral election is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Portland, Maine mayoral election until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Grahaml35 (talk) 05:22, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Elizabeth Helgelien moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Elizabeth Helgelien, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Htanaungg (talk) 08:27, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:2024 Richmond, Virginia, mayoral election

Hello, BottleOfChocolateMilk. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2024 Richmond, Virginia, mayoral election, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:02, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Bolding

Please stop bolding job titles for presidential challengers. The only one who should be bolded is Biden, because he is the incumbent, all the others are challengers for his job. Whether this that or the other was someone's most recent job is irrelevant, and no need for it to be bolded, as these lists are essentially resumes for those looking for Biden's job Vjmlhds (talk) 04:01, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Pictures

You realize that I don't have CropTool to fix the picture FYE31 (talk) 18:36, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

• FYE31 Everyone has CropTool. You just have to activate it: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:CropTool&withJS=MediaWiki:ActivateGadget.js&gadgetname=CropTool. More info on this page: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:CropTool BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 23:29, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

  BottleOfChocolateMilk Is there a way we can work to gather and fix the photo I known you did the File:Rose Grigoryan at CD6 Candidate Forum (cropped).png and I tried to do the exact same thing you did but my crop tool is not working right now so can you help me fix it please? FYE31 (talk) 21:39, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

  if I don't get a reply ill revert back the photo FYE31 (talk) 01:04, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Edit war warning: 2024 Republican Party presidential primaries

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Prcc27 (talk) 21:30, 21 June 2023 (UTC)