User talk:FairfieldAve

Welcome!

Hi FairfieldAve! I noticed your contributions to Vassili Schneider and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! jlwoodwa (talk) 21:15, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks FairfieldAve (talk) 23:23, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits

Hi and welcome. Please review each change that you make and ensure that the sentences make sense after your edits. Quite a few of your edits have been undone because you introduced grammatical errors and because sentences no longer made sense after you edited them. Hope that helps. Schazjmd (talk) 13:16, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I made some mistakes.FairfieldAve (talk) 15:11, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You just changed "oldest" to "first" in this edit, but they are not synonymous. There might have been zoos before that one that no longer exist. Being the oldest now doesn't mean it was the first ever. (In addition, the source didn't support "oldest" or "first" so I've removed that segment of the sentence.) Schazjmd (talk) 16:05, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Schazjmd At Wilson Jeremiah Moses “ Wilson J. Moses obtained his A.B. and M.A” was changed to “ “Wilson J. Moses awarded his A.B. and M.A” which is atrocious grammar. Also editing fring article s in what I see as a pov viee. Doug Weller talk 19:29, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller, I fixed the Moses article. I've gathered a bunch of diffs to support an ANI report if these problems continue. I think this editor has good intentions but lacks the writing skills to edit. Schazjmd (talk) 19:36, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They really aren’t competent. See my post below. Doug Weller talk 19:38, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know. I was hoping they'd realize their limitations and stop editing. Schazjmd (talk) 19:48, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Eureka, California, did not appear to be constructive and have 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. You are continuing to make edits that result in sentences that don't make sense. Schazjmd (talk) 16:12, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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, as you did at John B. Anderson, you may be blocked from editing. Schazjmd (talk) 18:38, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to pseudoscience and fringe science, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Doug Weller talk 19:32, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a real mess and anything but minor

[1] Doug Weller talk 19:37, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't that edit just remove a paragraph break? jlwoodwa (talk) 21:17, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jlwoodwa Agh, wrong link. Busy but will try to find right one. Maybe[ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eureka,_California&action=history] where an edit makes a locality not the base for two newspapers but actually two newpapers.. Or [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stockton,_California&diff=prev&oldid=1238097282[ where "removing the location of what" leaves " During the Gold Rush is now Stockton"/

These don't make up for the edits that aren't a problem, for marking edits as minor, or their misunderstanding of talk pages (not as important as the other problems). Doug Weller talk 08:44, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will try be more careful. FairfieldAve (talk) 15:13, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page comments

FairfieldAve, responding to talk page comments from 12 and 14 years ago isn't useful. And I'm afraid that your comments on this article's talk page aren't intelligible. If you speak another language fluently, you might find it more productive to edit the wikipedia for that language. Schazjmd (talk) 17:37, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am stopping on the pages. I am mainly wrote only. No problem. FairfieldAve (talk) 17:45, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can toss another little stick on this bonfire. I very recently made a small, accepted change to the page "Cannonball (LIRR train)" with an explanation in the respective talk page. FairfieldAve appended a 4 word, non-grammatical sentence fragment to my talk page entry, that seems to reinforce the belief here that their English is not sufficiently fluent for editing. Just my 2 cents worth . . . Dr.gregory.retzlaff (talk) 07:22, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for Not proficient enough in English.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Doug Weller talk 16:17, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]