ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter

Hello, ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Category:Premiership of Margaret Thatcher, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

• Article development
• Standard layout
• Lead section
• The perfect article
• Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! ✗plicit 11:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

 

A tag has been placed on Category:Premiership of Margaret Thatcher indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 11:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

 

A tag has been placed on Category:Premiership of John Major indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 11:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Keir Starmer a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Draft:Legal career of Keir Starmer. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. MarcGarver (talk) 14:31, 4 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

MarcGarver this still seems to be happening - [1]. Helper201 (talk) 01:32, 9 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits while logged out. Please be mindful not to perform controversial edits while logged out, or your account risks being blocked from editing. Please consider reading up on Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts before editing further. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:10, 4 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Boris Johnson into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 05:09, 7 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you have added Creative Commons licensed text to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as Draft:Countryhumans. You are welcome to import appropriate Creative Commons licensed content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Compatibly licensed sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any Creative Commons content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 09:47, 8 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at David Amess, 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. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 21:06, 15 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Your edit to Keir Starmer has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 18:40, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at 2024 United Kingdom general election, 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.
Apologies, this should have been sent several hours ago after this edit. Please provide a valid edit summary with your edits, particularly those in which you remove content. Adam Black ^{talk • contribs} 17:03, 17 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hullo: are you aware that the category you're pasting on every PM article doesn't exist? Tim O'Doherty (talk) 18:12, 8 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I did not know it had been renamed. Apologies. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 18:14, 8 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Please stop adding prime ministers to this category. If they are in the century specific category for Prime Ministers, they are automatically included in the main category. They do not have to be added to both. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 18:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Oh, I apologise. I'll help remove them right away. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 18:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

No problem. If the are listed in the century specific category, these are also within the main, parent category. Lots of categories work like this. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 18:31, 8 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I see, it's an understandable system. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 18:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Please stop mass removing correctly cited content from Wikipedia pages. Helper201 (talk) 01:17, 9 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

On this subject, it is really important that you start to use edit summaries more often. There is no issue with removing content at all if there are good reasons, but you really need to justify why you're doing something to let other editors know why you've done something Michaeldble (talk) 20:48, 9 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yeah that makes a lot of sense, I have used edit summaries in some edits but will now do this more often. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 21:36, 9 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

While I appreciate the thought, generally they're best not used on pages. What you might consider instead though is to check Wikiquote and see if there's a page set up for Revengeance, and then link that to Armstrong's external links in a similar way as we do with SHODAN. Hope that helps! Kung Fu Man (talk) 13:30, 10 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yeah I understand that, I'll see if there's a Wikiquote page set up and if there is, put the quote there.--ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 13:51, 10 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Hello ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter! Your additions to Theresa May have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it's important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:

• Limited quotation: You may only copy or translate a small portion of a source. Any direct quotations must be enclosed in double quotation marks (") and properly cited using an inline citation. More information is available on the non-free content page. To learn how to cite a source, see Help:Referencing for beginners.
• Paraphrasing: Beyond limited quotations, you are required to put all information in your own words. Following the source's wording too closely can lead to copyright issues and is not permitted; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when paraphrasing, you must still cite your sources as appropriate.
• Image use guidelines: In most scenarios, only freely licensed or public domain images may be used and these should be uploaded to our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. In some scenarios, non-freely copyrighted content can be used if they meet all ten of our non-free content criteria; Wikipedia:Plain and simple non-free content guide may help with determining a file's elegibility.
• Copyrighted material donation: If you hold the copyright to the content you want to copy, or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license the text for publication here. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Copying and translation within Wikipedia: Wikipedia articles can be copied or translated, however they must have proper attribution in accordance with Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. For translation, see Help:Translation § License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 22:58, 13 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Do you plan to create this page? 2A0A:EF40:E4A:E101:7840:DF74:1614:D4D1 (talk) 11:27, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I plan on getting round to it, so far I've done pages for the 2024 Labour and Conservative manifestos. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 11:29, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I saw that, thank you for making them pages! 2A0A:EF40:E4A:E101:7840:DF74:1614:D4D1 (talk) 11:31, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

No problem! --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 11:31, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Please stop removing the series templates from articles - I can't see where there's a consensus for that, just one other user saying to remove them — Czello ^(music) 15:54, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Alright, apologies. But I feel as though there should be a consensus for the series template on all office holders' bio pages. Can we establish one? --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 15:54, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

It is utterly preposterous of you to claim that a couple of lines of discussion on one American politician's talk page gives you consensus to remove the sidebars from all British PMs. DuncanHill (talk) 15:54, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yeah I now agree, apologies. But I feel as though there should be a consensus for the series template on all office holders' bio pages. Can we establish one? --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 15:56, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Please stop your bulk edits deleting series templates from British politicians' biography pages. You have not gained consensus for doing this. The "reason" you have been giving in your edit summaries is Removing series template. Per talk on Joe Biden's page, this template should be deleted from all office holders' bio pages. But if you read Talk:Joe Biden, it talks about American officeholders' biography pages. So it is not relevant to British politicians' biography pages.-- Toddy1 (talk) 15:57, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have already stopped doing this per the above reasons. But I do want to try and establish a consensus for it across all office holders' bio pages. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 15:58, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

It takes time for people to write these messages.

Why on earth would you want to do delete the series templates? They are useful (except possibly with recent American politicians who suffer from an overload of articles due to recentism).-- Toddy1 (talk) 16:04, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I apologize for that, and now see your point fully. I've even gone ahead and added some to pages that didn't have them before. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 16:05, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Creating controversy sections in articles is not a good idea. Please read WP:CSECTION.-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:08, 17 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I see your point, I'll also remove it from Corbyn's article too. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 09:09, 17 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Why did you add a sexual harassment category to a biography of a living person in this edit here when there is nothing in the article that supports its inclusion (or if there is something that supports its inclusion that I missed, can you please point it out to me)? Without a good reason and a reliable source, the addition of the category constitutes a not-insignificant BLP violation. Aoi (青い) (talk) 13:14, 17 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Apologies. He has been accused of sexual harassment, but I won't re-add the category until it's been covered in reliable sources. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 13:31, 17 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Please read WP:CATV and the other guidelines. Categories should be clearly supported by article text and citations. For example, Jimmy Savile was never a known member of the Conservative Party, he was a pal of Margaret Thatcher but that is all. Some of the categories that you have been adding recently are not adequately supported.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:37, 17 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Ah I see, thank you for clarifying that. I'll also keep WP:CATV in mind for future edits. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 16:41, 17 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have reverted various categories related to the premiership of British Prime Ministers. Simply occurring during the term of office of a Prime Minister is not notable enough, it would have to be a key part of their premiership.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 11:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Apologies for that, I understand your reasons for reverting. I'll only add those premiership categories to articles about key parts of respective premierships in future. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 12:03, 23 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I saw your comment on the Sunak talk page asking for a bit more depth on his premiership in the last paragraph. I've been working on rewriting his article here which has a reworked lead section if you'd like to take a look, although I probably won't be finished until some point next year. Cheers - Tim O'Doherty (talk) 15:50, 21 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

This looks absolutely brilliant, great job! A big improvement over the current version of the article. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 17:19, 21 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, you need to both provide a link to "Tim O'Doherty's sandbox" and provide the sources for the harv/sfn references in the text. DuncanHill (talk) 18:16, 21 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sure thing, the source is here --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 18:22, 21 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I mean YOU need to provide the link in an edit summary for attribution, and YOU need to add the sources to the article to fix the harv/sfn no-target errors you caused, instead of leaving it to others to fix for you. DuncanHill (talk) 18:51, 21 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter, I noticed your recent edit to 2024 United Kingdom general election in England had attributed copied content from 2024 United Kingdom general election. I just wanted to quickly point out that per WP:CWW/WP:ATTREQ, it is mandatory to provide a link to the source page, rather than just mentioning the name of the page. Irltoad (talk) 08:17, 23 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for letting me know. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 08:27, 23 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I've removed the episode descriptions as they are copyright and should be summarized in original prose instead, per our policy on non-free content. DanCherek (talk) 19:32, 24 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! I meant to get around that soon anyways. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 19:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I have fixed the harv/sfn no-target errors you made in United Kingdom and the Russian invasion of Ukraine. You also left undefined two refnames - <ref name="rfe" /> and <ref name="foreignminister.gov.au" /> If you could define them that would be appreciated. I expect you copied them from other articles, but I haven't been able to work out which. DuncanHill (talk) 19:41, 24 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I'll try and get round to it at some point. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 19:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Don't bother, I found them in List of humanitarian aid to Ukraine during the Russo-Ukrainian War. You REALLY need put more effort into your referencing, I often end up fixing errors caused by your failure to provide sources or define refnames. And when someone raises an error of yours "I'll try and get round to it at some point" really isn't an adequate response. DuncanHill (talk) 20:00, 24 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I am not sure about this change. Charles Ingram is mainly notable for what happened on Millionaire, and Diana is a huge part of that story; she was even a contestant before he was. So it would seem appropriate to display both of them. If a biographical subject were notable for something their spouse had little to do with, it would be different.

Also, take a look at this revert, which had nothing to do with actual content. The current article has things out of chronological order, and perhaps a bit of unnecessary commentary. I think a revert to this version would be a significant improvement. 103.42.228.154 (talk) 12:24, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I agree that your proposal to revert to that version would be a significant improvement. I support using the infobox picture of both of them, per what you've said. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 12:55, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

There was no need to split off the sexual abuse allegations into another article. All it did was to create a relatively short article which was a content fork. Articles should be split only if they are running into problems with length, see WP:SIZERULE. You have also justified this by citing WP:OTHERCONTENT, which is irrelevant. What happens at article A is not a justification for doing it at Article B. Please have a read through Wikipedia guidelines, as you are making a lot of edits that are not based on policy. ♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:50, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for advising me not to do this, I agree with your point that articles should be split only if they're running into problems with length. Apologies. Thank you for restoring Glitter's article to how it was before the split, I've done the same with Rolf Harris. The split articles are now back to redirects. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 07:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Please don't make any future edits based on arguments like "Article A has this, therefore Article B must have it as well." This is a clear violation of policy and the edits will likely be reverted straight away.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:08, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I understand, I won't make any further edits like this. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 08:15, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Despite your assurance that you wouldn't make edits like this anymore, you just did the same thing again at Labour Party leadership of Keir Starmer. Please discuss on an appropriate talk page before making wholesale changes across articles. It's not necessary (and in fact it's often undesirable) for every article to be consistent with each other. Aoi (青い) (talk) 07:05, 2 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Understood. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 08:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

 

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, 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.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

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.

'''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 10:20, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I noticed that you often edit a page multiple times in quick succession. I would suggest it would be better if you could do most edits in one if possible. If other editors want to read through the changes it becomes very time-consuming to have to read through multiple edits - 18 in the case of Keir Starmer's page this morning. In future, if you press 'show preview' before publishing you can play around/see what works before publishing. Hope this helps :) Michaeldble (talk) 14:16, 29 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Apologies, will do most edits in one when possible from now on. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 16:04, 29 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I really don't understand why you moved the Labour Party leadership of Keir Starmer to a redirect without any kind of consensus? This seems completely inappropriate to essentially delete an article without consensus Michaeldble (talk) 06:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

He's about to form a government in a few days time, so we'll have to establish a consensus then. I'll support whatever decision is reached. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 07:01, 2 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes that's fine, but please never make such a massive change without getting consensus first like you did there. I really don't understand why you did it in the first place let alone without discussing it on the talk page properly. Michaeldble (talk) 21:32, 2 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

No worries it won't happen again. Especially as we'll have to establish a consensus soon anyway. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 05:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Apologies for leaving yet another message, but please could you stop making so many edits all at once. On the Keir Starmer page you were asked to "please do small, well-explained edits, to help other editors keep up" and you said you'd stop in this thread above here. However, you did 20 edits on this article alone this morning and 13 on Monday. It would be far better if you explain your edits properly and make less frequent smaller edits. I do think you've done a lot of good work on that article in particular but I would ask again please can you stop doing this? Michaeldble (talk) 13:53, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Labour Party leadership of Keir Starmer, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 06:24, 1 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Keir Starmer, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 06:25, 1 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

In this edit you introduced a number of no-target errors. You then went and edited other article instead of adding the sources to the article. This behaviour, which seems commonplace for you, is disruptive and needs to stop. I have returned the article to the edit before. DuncanHill (talk) 10:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I apologise, I will not re-add the Harv and Sfn no-target errors in future edits. This will not happen again. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 10:36, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you for the immense amount of work you have contributed towards Keir Starmer & British politics in just such short time. I see traces of you everywhere I go related to such topics. Zinderboff(talk) 13:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

No problem! Have been glad to have helped out with those topics, Starmer in particular, whose article now looks a lot better than it did at the start of the election. Will continue to help out with his article as he assumes the premiership in two days time! --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 13:40, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I've always been interested in foreign elections partially due to the lack of vote we have here in the PRC, so it's always refreshing to find someone keen to improve said articles. Thank you again for your work (btw brilliant username, absolutely love it)! Zinderboff(talk) 13:54, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

No problem! It was a fitting username to use after Sunak's election announcement speech! Thank you for the kind words regarding my edits also. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 14:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I just came across the article about the so called "Blair Babes". In my non-native understanding of English it should probably be plural, and the article itself seems to generally refer to them in plural. However, the article title itself is singular. What's the correct iteration of such term? Zinderboff(talk) 18:31, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I see your point regarding this. I'd recommend taking this to the talk page of the article. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 18:56, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure which MOS or WP rule to cite for a move request of this kind though, do you have any ideas? Thanks! Zinderboff(talk) 22:08, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'd love to help out but I'm afraid I'm not sure either, so my best advice would be to take it to the talk page and see what others think. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 22:21, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

No worries, thank you for the help anyway. Hope you're having a great day! Zinderboff(talk) 22:25, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, and I certainly am. Though as a Labour supporter, I will have an even better day tomorrow and the day after! --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 22:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Really?[2] I'm not sure if I can even revert this edit once again. Maurnxiao (talk) 22:06, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

 Template:Starmer Shadow Cabinet has been nominated for merging with Template:Starmer Cabinet. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:35, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your contributions to Shadow Cabinet of Rishi Sunak. 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. Waqar💬 14:09, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey there. Just a quick heads up: Shadow Cabinets don't have templates because they are considered quite volatile and change more often. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:15, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for letting me know! --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 15:18, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

No worries! :) Usually what ends up happening is that we have dormant templates lying around which is worth avoiding.

Thank you, by the way, for the amazing work you've done since the election was announced! Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:27, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you so much for the kind words! Glad to be helping out with articles relating to the election. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 15:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Your edit to Premiership of Keir Starmer has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. C F A 💬 03:38, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your work on British election articles! Please do not remove copyright violation templates from articles. An administrator will remove them once they have checked and revdeled the article. Happy editing, C F A 💬 15:14, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the kind words! And I'll keep that in mind. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 15:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I think you are doing a lot of good work around Wikipedia, but this appears to be your fourth warning in less than a month regarding copyright violations. Please take these warnings seriously. There is a high likelihood that the next instance, if it occurs, will result in a preventative block. DanCherek (talk) 22:44, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the kind words in the first sentence. I apologise for those four instances. As I want to continue my good work here, I will take these warnings seriously and not do further edits that feature copyright violations. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 22:53, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter I have great respect for you, for all the good work you've put into UK political articles throughout this election, so I am sincerely sorry to disagree with you regarding the lead for the 2024 United Kingdom general election. Hopefully, we can discuss it and come to an agreement.

Best wishes and take care.

Scotlandshire44 (talk) 10:33, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

No worries! No editor is perfect and that includes myself, so I'm always open to constructive criticism. The reason I reverted it was because the articles for past elections such as 1997 have extremely long leads. If shorter leads are preferable, perhaps we should shorten the leads for the others for consistency? Thank you also for the kind words you've said about my editing of UK political articles throughout this election. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 10:37, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

You're most welcome. I would agree with you, regarding shortening the leads for the others. I could always help you if needed. Scotlandshire44 (talk) 10:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes please do, I could do with your assistance. You did a good job shortening the lead for the 2024 election. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 10:45, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Why did you put 2024 in the United States on the article COVID-19 pandemic in the United States? There is no COVID pandemic in USA in 2024 2A01:5A8:303:C65E:4531:C196:107:B175 (talk) 21:56, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter Would you mind changing the date format in the references of the above article to dmy format as per British English standards. It would be great if it could be done. You see, its a big task to apply the dmy format to all the references but if you could, it would be greatly appreciated. Furthermore, could you also move all the references cited in lead to the article body as per WP:LEAD. Looking forward to the changes and your response. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 07:37, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'll get round to this as soon as possible. Let me know if I end up missing any. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 07:42, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter as a notable editor in contemporary politics, would you consider adding new information for the article Prime Minister of the United Kingdom? Article is low on information and lacks many important details. In the section “Authority, Powers and Constraints” there need to be sub-topics discussing the legislative, executive, prerogative powers of the Prime Minister in sub-sections. Can you add the following details to the article? It would be very helpful for readers and I can’t edit the page because I am a new user. Altonydean (talk) 12:05, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'll do the best I can to add these important details in due time. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 12:17, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. Appreciate you taking on this task. Altonydean (talk) 14:10, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

No worries. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 14:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Alright, I hope you begin the process immediately. Best of luck. Altonydean (talk) 17:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

The reason why I am asking you to edit this particular article is that since you are capable of editing and improving articles that are in touch with current affairs and have been prominent these past few days in contributing greatly to British political figures and recent events. I hope that you could edit this article to the fruition and presentation that it needs to be updated. It has little information regarding the powers of the Prime Minister, especially the ones I mentioned above. I am unable to accomplish this because I am a new user and my account has to be at least five or four days old to edit this article so I hope that in within that time you can edit the edit this much better than I could I have made some contributions, but they are little in comparison to the improvements that you’ve made, so that’s why I came to you to ask you to edit this article to the utmost extent. I hope you begin the work now and soon. Good luck, mate. Altonydean (talk) 17:17, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I understand, as I say I will get round to it eventually. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 17:20, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

The changes in information at the article haven’t been made. But sorry if you feel bothered by my suggestions that you should edit this quickly, but, I think you’re just the right editor for this undertaking. I could edit the page but since my account has to be at least four days old, I am unable to edit the page due to semi-page protection. So please don’t take this as me just nagging you to do this, I apologise for any inconvenience, remember this is just a request. Altonydean (talk) 10:24, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I am getting worried about both the pace of your editing, and the username ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter. In the past few weeks you have made more edits to the UK political articles than most of the regular editors of these articles put together. This is not in itself a problem, but quite a few of the edits have not shown a clear understanding of policies and guidelines. Major changes usually require a consensus first, to avoid reverts and discussions afterwards. ♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 15:56, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Apologies. I've been complimented by other editors as being a notable editor in contemporary politics, but I see your point about making major changes without a consensus. Therefore, I shall avoid doing this from here on out. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 16:08, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I was just trying to find an appropriate picture to replace the one used before which was very low quality

No problem! --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 17:58, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John Swinney, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tommy Sheppard. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 06:25, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the kind words and for letting me know about this. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 08:03, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I noticed Starmer's pledge to reduce immigration is mentioned more than once, and it fails to mention Starmer aims to reduce net migration by improving training and skills for British workers. Could you expand on that for the page and make it more balanced?

Source: [3]https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn331vd99lzo 2A0A:EF40:E96:7B01:4DFB:9F97:C51C:3599 (talk) 15:04, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Done! --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 15:18, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Cheers! 2A0A:EF40:E96:7B01:4DFB:9F97:C51C:3599 (talk) 15:19, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

On England under politcs, it's outdated now, do you think you could update it after the recent election? I'm not exactly sure the number of MPs from each party representing England itself. But I'm sure it coul be worked out? 2A0A:EF40:E96:7B01:4DFB:9F97:C51C:3599 (talk) 15:40, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Done! --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 15:56, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! Sorry to ask but as you can imagine not all of us can edit the page. :) 2A0A:EF40:E96:7B01:4DFB:9F97:C51C:3599 (talk) 16:01, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

No problem! Let me know if you come across other outdated information. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 16:02, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Opps, you forgot the Green Party! 2A0A:EF40:E96:7B01:8C7D:ED24:DC3C:1C7C (talk) 23:39, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Taken care of! --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 23:42, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! 2A0A:EF40:E96:7B01:8C7D:ED24:DC3C:1C7C (talk) 23:53, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

No problem! --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 00:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, hope you're having a great day! I personally never had/noticed any problems with your edits, and am deeply appreciative of the crazy amount of work you put in. However, seeing your talk page it seems that many do, and mainly for the reason of unknowing violations of WP and MOS guidelines. For that I do recommend you to read up on some of the rules so that you can continue your amazing work within the framework of Wikipedia if you haven't done so already, cheers! 15:33, 8 July 2024 (UTC) Zinderboff(talk) 15:33, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the kind words! I've already set about making edits that do not violate those guidelines, to be able to continue the amazing work I have done. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 15:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply