Hi LadybugStardust! I noticed your contributions 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! Synorem (talk) 05:28, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Velella was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of films). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Two out the four sources are very closely affiliated. The final source is a very sparse review. Not nearly enough here to estanish notability

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Human Contraptions and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

 Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   21:32, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LadybugStardust! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!  Velella  Velella Talk   21:32, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Concrete TV. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   21:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added sources that established notability, so the notability template was no longer necessary. I see that you removed all of my revisions for no reason. I restored my revisions, but the articles for deletion template is back on the top of the article.--LadybugStardust (talk) 22:13, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. You added text sourced directly from Concrete TVs own website. We can have no idea whether the quotes were true or simply invented. Removing an AFD template is considered vandalism and in general such edits are reverted in their entirety. If I had recreated the AFD script after your additional edits, it would not have tied up with the original AFD discussion which would then be in two duplicate parts.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:21, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the one from Boing Boing, I linked to directly from Boing Boing. The others, I am working on hunting down through Google Books. It's very unlikely that they were invented, but I know that I have to find the original sources. Like I said, I'm working on it.--LadybugStardust (talk) 22:26, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 01:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LadybugStardust! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Brendan O'Neill (columnist) 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:Brendan O'Neill (columnist), 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. Grayfell (talk) 18:55, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Brendan O'Neill (columnist) 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. Grayfell (talk) 19:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Concrete TV, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Concrete TV until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, 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.

TarnishedPath^talk 02:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Mama Lion requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. thetechie@wikimedia: ~/talk/ $ 01:21, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I see from the talk:Mama Lion that you've found some sources. Verifiability is one of the important policies of Wikipedia. Right now, the article has no sources. You will need to add them to the article. See Help:Referencing for beginners for some basic information. If you run into difficulty, I suggest you get some help at the Teahouse. -- Whpq (talk) 03:20, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Working on it right now. Someone else just nominated the article for speedy deletion again, so please remove their tag.--LadybugStardust (talk) 03:33, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello LadybugStardust,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Mama Lion for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

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

Hughesdarren (talk) 03:28, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, we just did this.--LadybugStardust (talk) 03:33, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LadybugStardust. Thank you for your work on Oh Sun. Voorts, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Please remember to tag redirects that you create per WP:REDCAT.

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

voorts (talk/contributions) 02:38, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Noidan kirot. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Boleyn (talk) 16:37, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! LadybugStardust, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Liz Read! Talk! 01:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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:LadybugStardust reported by User:Grayfell (Result: ). Thank you. Grayfell (talk) 19:15, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. This is a standard message to inform you that articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:04, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]