Your edits to Technical support scam edit

Your edit here is problematic for several reasons. First, you claim that the text was generated by ChatGPT. That's never an appropriate way to add information to an encyclopedia (since the information ChatGPT provides may or may not be correct). Next, the info was unsourced. Thirdly, it read like an advice column, which is not what Wikipedia is for. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 19:35, 12 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

"VOG-L04 11.0.0.170(C792E10R1P3)" listed at Redirects for discussion edit

  The redirect VOG-L04 11.0.0.170(C792E10R1P3) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 18 § VOG-L04 11.0.0.170(C792E10R1P3) until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:46, 18 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Speedy deletion nomination of Tyopgraphical error edit

 

A tag has been placed on Tyopgraphical error requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, 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. Awesome Aasim 17:27, 1 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion edit

  Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Félix_An reported by User:Johnny Au (Result: ). Thank you. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 14:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

April 2024 edit

 

Your recent editing history at Toronto shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 14:33, 3 April 2024 (UTC)Reply