User talk:TheManTheyCallAdam

April 2021

Hello, I'm TJRC. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, George Stinney, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. TJRC (talk) 18:32, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello sir. Apologizes for forgetting to add a source I will link it here. https://m.imgur.com/gallery/sV3RKzr. TheManTheyCallAdam (talk) 12:58, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a reliable source. Anyone could have posted that. TJRC (talk) 16:20, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 2021

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Raheem Sterling. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:10, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Ric Flair article

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. McPhail (talk) 11:56, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I gave you a valid reason. And a realible source TheManTheyCallAdam (talk) 09:05, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did leave a valid reason. I wrote a comment explain why, while also leaving a reliable source. TheManTheyCallAdam (talk) 00:04, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022

Hi TheManTheyCallAdam! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Big Van Vader several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Big Van Vader, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. NebY (talk) 09:39, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm NebY. Your recent edit(s) to the page Big Van Vader appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been reverted for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. You have changed "widely regarded as one of the greatest", which is what the source says and what the article has said for nearly five years, to "widely regarded as the greatest", which is not what the source says. NebY (talk) 09:47, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It has been like this for 3 years, If you look at Hulk Hogans wiki, John Cenas wiki, Triple H wiki its the same thing. TheManTheyCallAdam (talk) 16:32, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2022

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Big Van Vader. 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. See Talk:Big Van Vader#Widely regarded as one of the greatest and respond there. In the meantime, stop trying to force your removal of sourced text. NebY (talk) 19:53, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia

You did not identify the source of the material in your edit. It appears to be Golden tiger. Copying within Wikipedia is acceptable but it must be attributed.

This type of edit does get picked up by Copy Patrol and a good edit summary helps to make sure we don't accidentally revert it. However, for future use, would you note the best practices wording as outlined at Wikipedia:Copying_within_Wikipedia? In particular, linking to the source article and adding the phrase "see that page's history for attribution" helps ensure that proper attribution is preserved.

While best practices are that attribution should be added to the edit summary at the time the edit is made, the linked article on best practices describes the appropriate steps to add attribution after the fact. I hope you will do so.

I've noticed that this guideline is not very well known, even among editors with tens of thousands of edits, so it isn't surprising that I point this out to some veteran editors, but there are some t's that need to be crossed.S Philbrick(Talk) 18:50, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I used the source from the other wiki and put it as a source. Would instead have to find the origin of the source? TheManTheyCallAdam (talk) 18:56, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Danish monarchs

Howdy. I recommend that you stop trying to implement that Margrethe II reigned as Danish monarch 'longer' than Christian IV. Continuing to do so, might be seen as disruptive. GoodDay (talk) 14:54, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did not say that. I said that Margrethe regined longer than Christian(indicates she did) and Christian has sat on thr throne longer than Margrethe(in which he did). I'm a Dane btw. So I recommend you deal with that. TheManTheyCallAdam (talk) 02:03, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christian IV reigned as Danish monarch longer than Margrethe II. It doesn't matter that he had a regent during his early years, just like it doesn't matter that Britain's George III had a regent during his later years. Regencies didn't shorten their reigns. GoodDay (talk) 06:34, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

if you look st the wiki page about the longest verified monarchs reign it clearly states that time as a non crowned monarch, isn't counted TheManTheyCallAdam (talk) 11:27, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:BrianFromDenmark.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:BrianFromDenmark.jpeg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:30, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

T/the Big Bear in Sonny Liston

Please review our guideline WP:THE. My understanding is there would need to be wide recognition that the 'The' is capitalized for us to do so (i.e. "The Big Bear" isn't exactly like "The Beatles"). Just because a source here and there capitalizes 'The' doesn't mean we are required to. Our guidelines are largely about how we present information in this work, which isn't necessarily how sources show it. Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^Gab • Gruntwerk 18:40, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

its basic grammar. "The Big Bear" is a name. The first letter in a name is capitalized. TheManTheyCallAdam (talk) 20:26, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's basic grammar to not capitalize 'The' in the middle of a sentence, except when 'The' is widely known as a necessarily capitalized word in the name. Have you read the guideline? Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^Gab • Gruntwerk 23:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"The Big Bear" is a name. Just like "The Green Mile" or "The Shawnshank Redemption" or "The Great Gatzby". All spelt with a capitalized t. If Sonnys nickname was just "Big Bear" then the t wouldn't be capitalized, but his nickname is "The Big Bear", ergo capitalized T. Basic grammar TheManTheyCallAdam (talk) 21:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per what I've already said, that frankly is a simplistic contention about the grammar and not in line with Wikipedia's guidelines. Have you read WP:THE? Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^Gab • Gruntwerk 21:35, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it's a nickname, not a title of a film or name of a band widely recognized with a capital 'T' in 'The'. Unfortunately, what you're doing here is substituting personal opinion in place of grammar and our guidelines. Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^Gab • Gruntwerk 21:40, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To assure myself that I was above board, I asked for guideline assistance on this matter, and was pointed to MOS:THENAME, which makes very clear that 'the' is not to be capitalized in this case. See specifically the examples: 1) Use Dwayne "the Rock" Johnson not Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson; 2) In running text, the team is the Miami Heat, not The Miami Heat, except at the beginning of a sentence. Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^Gab • Gruntwerk 23:33, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The most precise guideline here is MOS:THENICKNAME. We don't go by any individual's sense of how the English language works. We have a Manual of Style that sets how we write. Please move on from this, or it may begin to appear you are engaged in tendentious editing. You are otherwise a good editor and I'd rather not see your account get into trouble. Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^Gab • Gruntwerk 16:13, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 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 Sonny Liston, 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. Please cease WP:TENDENTIOUS editing of this article against the plainly stated Manual of Style guideline MOS:THENICKNAME. Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^Gab • Gruntwerk 16:46, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^Gab • Gruntwerk 02:55, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

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) 00:40, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]