User talk:Heymisterscott

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Wikipedia and copyright

Control copyright icon Hello Heymisterscott! Your additions to

suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism
issues.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Signed,The4lines |||| (Talk) (Contributions) 03:07, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 2022

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Nose have 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: Nose was changed by Heymisterscott (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.956832 on 2022-02-03T02:34:26+00:00

Thank you.

talk) 02:34, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

September 2023

Information icon Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Nudity in religion. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. --WikiLinuz {talk} 04:04, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not revert to edits which state the opposite view of the cited material. Please bother to read cited material. You know what it is called when someone states a view outside of a cited source? A POINT OF VIEW. You clearly did not have the slightest sense of what the cited material had said when you decided to smash that revert button back to stating an opinion based statement which was not shared by the cited article. So how about instead of attacking people for trying to ensure material reflects the cited articles, you either buzz off or actually read the articles cited. Reverting back to someone’s personal opinion which is the opposite view of the cited article is not appropriate. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. “Thank you” Heymisterscott (talk) 04:05, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

make personal remarks about other editors Wracking talk! 04:01, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

What is this referring to? Heymisterscott (talk) 06:46, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is referring to your edit summaries, such as Just….no. This article looks like it was written by a blindfolded ape [1] and Fixed absolutely horrendous grammar. Whoever wrote this should never ever edit again. [2]. See
WP:SUMMARYNO. Thanks, Wracking talk! 19:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
I would apologize, but I'm really not sorry.
Thanks Heymisterscott (talk) 19:31, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]