Welcome!

Hello, BubbleBabis, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Andreas Michaelides, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted (if it hasn't already).

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

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, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Wuhwuzdat (talk) 12:31, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Andreas Michaelides 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 person or group of people, but it does not 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 12:31, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop trying to add information about Blitzkrieg to the Invasion of Poland (1939) article. Your addition is poorly written: it has spelling mistakes, grammar mistakes and it does not flow smoothly or allow the reader to understand easily your intent. You include the unprovable assertion that the Nazi war technology was unbeatable — they lost the war, didn't they? Binksternet (talk) 17:40, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have repeatedly added the same poorly-written text to Invasion of Poland (1939) without engaging in discussion regarding how best to present the information. You have repeatedly been warned. At this point, your re-insertions of this material will be considered vandalism. Binksternet (talk) 16:19, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Felix Magath, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. --Jaellee (talk) 12:18, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't object to the description of of Magath as "strict", although his training methods are already described at the beginning of the paragraph. But the other stories seem to be humorous exaggerations at the first read, so you should add references for them. Readers (such as I) won't believe it without further proof. I've googled and found some references for the nudist training here [1] (it's Bild-Zeitung, well...), but nothing so far for the night training session. Just provide some references and you can put it back in. --Jaellee (talk) 18:18, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay ... --Jaellee (talk) 12:35, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just writing to you wondering as to why you added a link to a site which has no real affiliation to World Wrestling Entertainment to the External Link section. Afkatk - Afro Twinky (talk) 16:01, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Your test on the page Konstantinos Plevris worked, and has been removed. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing and its related help page for more information. Thank you. Ixfd64 (talk) 12:44, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary for your edits. Thank you. StaticGull  Talk  14:16, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add defamatory content, as you did to arrogance, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Oldak Quill 01:59, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your reverts on Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas storyline. Will you please stop reverting my fix to this page. You are causing an error message to a page which is supposed to be a redirect. Debresser (talk) 14:24, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiAnswers is not a reliable source. So any edits with that as a source will be reverted. SE KinG. ^{User page.} _Talk. 01:03, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. As you may or may not be aware, File:Hot coffee.png is a Fair use image, which means that any use outside of the pages for which a reasonable rationale exists (at the moment, only Hot Coffee minigame controversy and Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas) is a copyright infringement. This is covered at Wikipedia:User page#Images on user pages. The image has already been removed many times by a bot and once by a human, all of which you reverted. I'm very sorry that nobody has left you a note regarding this (as far as I can see) but it really does have to be removed. I sincerely hope you don't mind me editing your userpage and doing so. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:11, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello BubbleBabis! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 943 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Panicos Orphanides - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Jan Remmers - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. Andreas Michaelides - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 08:07, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Tupac-house-of-blues-1996.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:43, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Golden Dawn (Greece), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 01:02, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Chronic, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Cop Killer and Poetic Justice. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:51, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tsarist officers in the Red Army, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Noble (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:31, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tsarist officers in the Red Army, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Armenian and Ukrainian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Diego Simeone, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page River Plate (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sergey Kamenev, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Don, Tula and Orel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Scorched earth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Palatinate (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:34, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited German revolutions of 1848–49, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bivouac (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:15, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Diego Simeone. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:36, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tsarist officers in the Red Army, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Armenian and Azerbaijani (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tsarist officers in the Red Army, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alexander Yegorov (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:01, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:24, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Romanticism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Enlightenment.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Romanticism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Antiquity.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:12, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Romanticism, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Internationalism, Naturalism and Traditionalism.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

German philosophy

added links pointing to State, Quietism, Friedrich Adler and United States of North America

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:21, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've opened a discussion regarding Talk:Slava Ukraini#Newspaper image at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Talk:Slava Ukraini#Newspaper image, thanks! Manyareasexpert (talk) 16:47, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

-- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 18:07, 27 September 2023 (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.

Non-boilerplate addendum: Please read WP:BLP thoroughly before making further edits regarding living persons, especially those who are controversial. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 18:09, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you're unable to judge what counts as a reliable source for a contentious claim about a living person, please stop trying to add such claims. You've now cited six unreliable sources. With BLPs we don't get to play fast and loose, adding poorly sourced claims in hopes that reliable sources will come along. If you have questions about whether a source is reliable, you can ask on the article's talkpage or at WP:RSN. But until an actually reliable source covers this, please stop re-adding the text in question. Doing so is edit warring. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 23:14, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

is an archived copy of Sarah's own (now deleted) tweet a reliable source? -- BubbleBabis (talk) 12:37, 28 Septembr 2023 (UTC)

Depending on means of archival, it may be a reliable source for the tweet's own contents. It would not be a reliable source for any surrounding context, and would not establish due weight for discussing this incident. Ashton-Cirillo has sent tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of tweets. We need to look to reliable sources to say which are worth discussing. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 02:15, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's archived through Wayback Machine, it contains Ashton-Cirillo's "rebuttal" of the content. On whether it is of due weight for the Ashton-Cirillo page, there's the example of the Stephen King page which contains a paragraph on him being pranked last year by the same Russian pranksters and the subsequent tweet he made - so I contend that for the Ashton-Cirillo page the incident passes the "importance test". On the sources' reliability, the Vovan and Lexus page contains refs to: Bitchute video of one prank, their own Telegram channel for another, rutube etc. So my proposal is: restore the paragraph about the prank on the Sarah article, giving as ref for the prank video the pranksters' Telegram channel where they've uploaded it, and as ref for Sarah's response tweet the archived copy from the Wayback Machine. -- BubbleBabis (talk) 18:46, 28 Septembr 2023 (UTC)

First, the video is only reliable for its own existence—not for the veracity of any claims made therein—same as the tweet. Second, at the King article, due weight is established by the Mediaite source. Since that exists, there's no issue with subsequently citing King's tweet (although a secondary source that in turn cites it might be better). Here, neither the YouTube video nor the tweet establishes that this is something reliable sources care about. Rather, available evidence indicates that reliable sources do not (yet) care about this. And Wikipedia articles follow the reliable sources, not what editors find interesting or important. Fundamentally, you cannot conjure reliable source coverage out of thin air. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 21:40, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To add, you are not a judge of what groups can "liberate" something. WP:RS says that the Kraken Regiment liberated a village, like how in the World War II article, which is a WP:GA, it also mentions areas being liberated. There is no reliable source indicating that their liberation of the village resulted in anything other than that, regardless of your personal feelings about Kraken's "checkered history" which itself is based largely on Russian accusations. The article is under the same contentious topic, so you may not want to edit war in order to introduce your own preferred wording over what the cited reference actually says.

@Tamzin Also pinging the administrator who initially notified you of this topic in case she has further input. TylerBurden (talk) 19:56, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TylerBurden: My comments above are in my capacity as a content editor (GA'd and maintain  Sarah Ashton-Cirillo), so I cannot comment here in an admin capacity. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|she) 20:52, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"largely Russian accusations" = Kraken leader Serhiy Velichko appearing on video in May 2022 admitting that his unit shot Russian POWs in the knees. "Largely Russian accusations" = Velichko and Nemichev being imprisoned in Ukraine until 25 February 2022 (video of then-Prosecutor-General of Ukraine Irina Venediktova announcig their early release because of the war). The Nazi origins of the unit (from Metalist Kharkiv's "Sect 82" hooligans and Nemichev's leading role in "National Corps" and "Azov" formations in 2014 - long before they started "self-denazifying" to avoid controversy) is well-documented within the article itself. The word "liberated" in the article appears once, sourced from WP. Wikipedia has no obligation to use the exact language as its sources: in this occasion it not only is non-NPOV but, given the article also records the unit's not-so-good past, the very use of the word becomes problematic. The reader will conclude that Nazi-affiliated, war crime-admitting convicts can be "liberators" of a given place. Just imagine an article in Wikipedia writing something "Wagner convicts liberated the village" just because a source wrote it that way. -- BubbleBabis (talk) 23:44, 8 Novembr 2023 (UTC)

And all of this, WP:OR. Stop edit warring to go against WP:RS based on your personal beliefs. --TylerBurden (talk) 18:47, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! ~Anachronist (talk) 17:00, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Kraken Regiment, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history, as well as helping prevent edit conflicts. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. - Sumanuil. _{(talk to me)} 03:42, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Kraken Regiment. 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. TylerBurden (talk) 18:46, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Yoav Gallant, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gaza War.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Qasem Soleimani, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Iraqi insurgency.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to the Arab–Israeli conflict. This is a standard message to inform you that the Arab–Israeli conflict 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. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 22:06, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for pitching in at Talk:Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Israeli attack on Gaza. More attention on the subject can help the community come to a reasonable decision. But I noticed the input you provided is based on your personal analysis of the subject. This type of input can be counterproductive, because consensus on Wikipedia should be based on reliable sources and policy-based arguments. In the case of a page move, arguments should be based on what the subject is explicitly called in reliable sources, not what individual editors understand or determine it to be. Personal interpretation or analysis is generally given little to no weight when determining the results of the discussion. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:58, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use tweets to source significant or controversial statements on a page about BLP, as you have for Destiny (streamer). FortunateSons (talk) 12:10, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Yinon Plan into Neoconservatism. 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. DanCherek (talk) 02:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]