User talk:GigachadGigachad

Hello, I'm Bentogoa. I noticed that in this edit to Gloucester County, New Jersey, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Bentogoa (talk) 17:23, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to 2016 United States presidential election in Maryland, 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. ~~ lol1VNIO (I made a mistake? talk to me • contribs) 15:15, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often use edit summaries. 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! Bishonen | tålk 09:10, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020 United States presidential election in New York, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saratoga. 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) 09:20, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This edit removed Chris Smith as a notable in the article for Hamilton Township, Mercer County, New Jersey. There is a source there and I could find many more to support his connection. There was no edit summary for the removal. I will revert the change, but am I missing something? Alansohn (talk) 14:52, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

––FormalDude talk 07:02, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you never use edit summaries. 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. Bishonen | tålk 09:10, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit you removed material about the appointment of a current councilmember due to a COVID death and the details of changes in legislative districts. All of this material was fully sourced. Why do you think this should be removed from the article and why with no explanation? Alansohn (talk) 14:52, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please read this to understand why they should not be added back in MappedTables (talk) 20:58, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at 2016 United States elections, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. I noticed that you removed information but with the edit comment "updated formatting". This is misleading as it does not explain your removal of information. I have only looked at a few of your recent edits, but this seems to be a pattern. I can see that you were recently warned about removals and the proper use of edit comments. Sjö (talk) 06:34, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page 1884 United States presidential election has an edit summary that appears to be inadequate, inaccurate, or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 05:02, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Government of New Jersey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Teresa Ruiz.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from New Jersey General Assembly into Government of New Jersey. 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. — Diannaa (talk) 00:32, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for working to improve the site with your edit to Hudson County, New Jersey, as we really appreciate your participation. However, the edit had to be reverted, because Wikipedia cannot accept uncited material. Wikipedia requires that the material in its articles be accompanied by reliable, verifiable (usually secondary) sources explicitly cited in the article text in the form of an inline citation, which you can learn to make here.

I'd also like you to know that I'm aware that the passage that was in the article right before where you added yours was also uncited, and I removed that one as well, so I'm not singling you out.

If you ever have any other questions about editing, or need help regarding the site's policies, just let me know by leaving a message for me in a new section at the bottom of my talk page. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 18:17, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This edit again removed without any justification details of the end of commissioners term as director and deputy director, again with the rather ambiguous edit summary "updated formatting". Why are you persistently removing these details, which explain information that is backed by sources and that explains how the terms of office work for individual commissioners? Alansohn (talk) 18:58, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at New Jersey's 18th legislative district. You've been asked often enough to explain your edits. Drmies (talk) 14:32, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Alansohn, do you have any opinion on this editor's most recent unexplained edits? Because I am getting ready to block them for their lack of communication. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:34, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, I forgot to label that. I merely sought to streamline the legislative pages with each other. GigachadGigachad (talk) 14:36, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I appreciate that--but I have to go back a few hundred edits to find edit summaries, and as Alansohn noted above, "update formatting" isn't very informative. I strongly encourage you to be more specific, more explanatory, and also to respond to talk page messages as you did just now. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:50, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. Thank you. GigachadGigachad (talk) 14:51, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The lack of an effort to reach out to other editors about these changes is a big part of the problem, but the cryptic edit summaries and lack of communication at this talk page has been the fundamental issue. I hope that we will see meaningful communication going forward. Alansohn (talk) 02:44, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at this edit as an example. The articles had had two different history sections, one titled "Apportionment history" and the other "Election history". The Apportionment section covered changes made to the district adding and removing communities as part of the reapportionment process following the decennial census, while the Election section covered the history of who was elected. Now all of the history is combined into a single chronology section labelled "Apportionment history", which makes no sense. Alansohn (talk) 02:58, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I don't believe the templates such as Template:NJ Atlantic County Commissioners is particularly useful and I would ask, why you are creating them? You are doing some great work on Wikipedia, but you are creating a Wikipedia:Walled garden. I haven't been able to find any commissioner in the templates that actually has a Wikipedia article, but maybe there is one. Regardless, it does not make sense to create templates that don't have any links inside of them. The whole point of a template is to redirect users to other articles; these templates do not. --PerpetuityGrat (talk) 14:55, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, totally disregard this. Saw that you did not create this, I'll likely nominate these for deletion. They aren't even proper templates. --PerpetuityGrat (talk) 15:02, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I noticed you're making a lot of edits on old presidential election pages, but you're always putting "updated formatting" as your edit summary, even when your edits are very substantial. Would you please be more specific with your edit summaries, especially to provide explanations for when you delete large portions of a page as you did with the 1988 United States presidential election in Michigan page? Thanks, OutlawRun (talk) 18:33, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just requested that he/she lose editing privileges. This keeps on happening over and over and over again, without any explanation. Absolutely absurd that there haven't been consequences yet. Cpotisch (talk) 10:19, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistently editing without explanation for the changes you make, and frequently, even worse, providing edit summaries which completely misrepresent what you are doing. After the number of times you have been asked to change your ways in this respect,a block for just a few days is minimal, and I hope you will not return to the same ways after the block is over, so that you won't need to be blocked for a longer period. I also note other problems with your editing, such as persistent failure to provide references for information you add to articles. If you wish to continue as a Wikipedia editor uou must start providing citations to reliable sources. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  JBW (talk) 14:06, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW Can someone with the power to do so revert all of their problematic edits? Thanks. Cpotisch (talk) 17:20, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can go in and adjust them to bring them up to the rules, if that would help. GigachadGigachad (talk) 18:55, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well considering that you're currently blocked, and that you haven't proven that you understand the problems with your edits, I think we'll leave it to either me or someone else to reverse the damage. Do you recognize what the issue is here? And can you explain why you kept doing it after numerous other people asked you to stop? Cpotisch (talk) 20:32, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the issue with the vagueness of my edits, but some of my edits were small typo-changes that fit my descriptions. I do realize that I should have made myself clearer with others. If you'll give me the opportunity to give more detailed edits after the ban expires that would be most appreciated. I would not want to burden you when I am the one who made these changes. Thanks for your consideration, and apologies. GigachadGigachad (talk) 20:40, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have the authority to unblock or re-block you, but it really is worth emphasizing that the issue wasn't "vagueness". It was blatant misrepresentation. In August, you were specifically warned about using the edit summary "updated formatting" when making wholesale changes to content. What part of that was unclear? One user literally said that ""updated formatting" isn't very informative. I strongly encourage you to be more specific, more explanatory, and also to respond to talk page messages as you did just now." Yet you continued to virtually never reply to talk page messages, and you used that exact description over and over and over again.

For example, in this edit and this edit, you removed more than 1,500 characters of well-sourced information and called it "updated formatting" You didn't rewrite it or move it, so there is absolutely no reasonable way that this could be described as a matter of formatting. There were many instances of this, and it still doesn't seem like you recognize the problem. Cpotisch (talk) 22:01, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You should read up page to this section where the user was told to use edit summaries with no explanation of what they are or why they should use them. I'm confused by this. I very rarely use edit summaries and neither do most Wikipedians. Why it is so important for this user to use them I don't know. The user has clearly used them in ignorance. Your anger is not understandable. 51.52.8.226 (talk) 21:04, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Let's be perfectly clear about this. This is not a case of "I should have made myself clearer", it's a case of "I shouldn't have repeatedly told blatant and deliberate lies". For example, this edit had the edit summary "updated formatting", but it had nothing whatever to do with formatting: it removed a substantial amount of sourced text, and also added unsourced text. You knew perfectly well that what you wrote in your edit summary was not just unclear; it was totally untrue. You were lying, and there's no other way about it. And of course, as you know, that was just one example: there are many many more. If you continue to pretend that it was something other than what it was, you are likely to get yourself blocked for much longer. Why don't you try being honest, and see how that works out? JBW (talk) 22:31, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that my lack of clarity appears to be dishonesty, but that was not my intention. I share many of the same interests you do in providing quality edits and my failure to justify that is purely my own. As I said before, I offered to fix any and all instances of editorial dishonesty before you reverted all the edits made in the last week. If that is your final decision, so be it, but I did offer to improve them. GigachadGigachad (talk) 22:57, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Be specific. Why did you delete material in the edits I mentioned, and why did you call it “updating formatting”? And why did you continue to use that phrase after you were explicitly asked not to. Because, to be frank, it feels like you’re being dishonest now by pretending that your edits weren’t what they were. It’s not just a matter of “clarity”. Cpotisch (talk) 23:08, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I continued to use the phrase on instances where I did actually update the format of the page, although as I have said, that may have been too broad a phrase for those wholesale deletions. In regards to those deletions, I found they were irrelevant to the page in which they were placed, as I felt the broad policy platform descriptions of those elections would be better suited for the main election page rather than the individual state pages which (outside of the 1984 and 1988 elections) were mainly used to describe the voting patterns of the state itself. I see that I may have overstepped in making those decisions, but I ask that you reconsider the wholesale reversion of all my edits in the last week and ask that I be allowed to make the necessary changes as you deem fit. GigachadGigachad (talk) 23:43, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well I guess we'll see what happens once your block expires. In the meantime, it looks like all of your significant edits in recent months have been reverted. Just how it goes. Cpotisch (talk) 00:53, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You would have to have a weird idea of what "formatting" means to explain why you used that expression for some of your edits, such as this one, which changed some wording, and added more wording, bu did not change anything that can be described as "formatting" in any sense that I know of. However, for the sake of argument let's give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you really do understand "formatting" in some totally strange sense which does apply to those edits. That still leaves the fact, however, that you cannot possibly have thought that in this edit "fixed typo" was what you were doing, as your edit summary said. Even worse is this edit, with the edit summary "updated formatting and fixed typos", despite the fact that the edit just added text; it did not change anything already there, either typos or anything else, nor did it change any formatting of anything. Then we have this edit, with the edit summary "fixed typo)", which is absolutely absurd. Good faith but careless or slipshod editing? Perhaps so if it were a one off, or just a few isolated edits, but there are literally hundreds of examples. You can twist words around however you like, but the fact is clear, that you have persistently and frequently used edit summaries which you knew full well misrepresented what you were doing. You may well have done so because you just didn't care whether you misled people and didn't bother to do better, rather than because you set out with a positive aim of deceiving, but the fact remains that you did so knowing full well that you were saying things that just weren't true. Insisting otherwise when anyone who looks at the editing history can see what you did is, to put it politely, unwise, because it just adds to the impression of dishonesty. JBW (talk) 22:46, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GigachadGigachad Do you have a response to these examples? Cpotisch (talk) 01:39, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you and the other posters here so het up about edit summaries? The majority of Wikipedia editors don't use them, they're meaningless, so long as an edit is accurate its edit summary is irrelevant; calm down and stop persecuting this user over nothing. 51.52.8.226 (talk) 21:07, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You were harassed above by an editor who took vengeance on you for daring to edit New Jersey government templates. Some of these templates were already deleted and the same cast of characters have the remaining templates up for deletion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 November 13. You may want to review and share your thoughts on the pros and cons of these templates. Alansohn (talk) 17:52, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:TRIVIA, WP:OR, and WP:INDISCRIMINATE, Wikipedia articles should not be crammed with random details no notable source has covered unless they are inherently notable (in this case it would be something like win percentages, percent reporting, stuff like that— not “last time a democrat won in this district in this county in Wisconsin until 2008”) Dronebogus (talk) 14:26, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Blaze Wolf. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, 2022 United States elections, 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 referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:44, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This edit is an example of where you've changed the district for the new redistricting, but you haven't added any sources. How do *YOU* know that it's in a new district? If you have a source, add the source. But you can't use a 2012 source for 2022 districts. Alansohn (talk) 03:39, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

2012 United States presidential election in Delaware

added a link pointing to John Carney

2012 United States presidential election in New Mexico

added a link pointing to Steve Pearce

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. I’ve tried to keep my distance on this because your edits have become less problematic since your block, but there are some real issues with your recent contributions. You constantly add material that you yourself describe as “trivia”, despite the fact that trivia is strongly discouraged unless there’s some real significance to it. Furthermore, you frequently make changes to the wording in well-written sentences that makes it far clunkier. And, as the above user noted, you have made a number of unsourced edits recently. I do recommend that you consider taking a step back and considering how others have responded to your contributions, because I think it’s not super positive. Best, Cpotisch (talk) 06:10, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Understood GigachadGigachad (talk) 16:08, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at 2000 United States presidential election, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. CastJared (talk) 08:22, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia.

This is getting extremely tedious and patience is running thin. Stop spamming articles with trivia and badly worded sentences. This edit adds some extremely trivial, unimportant, and unsourced information to the lede. It does not need to be there. Plus we already told you that "trivia" is discouraged unless it is significant and/or covered in a reliable source, and you continue to ignore those reminders. This is even more egregiously unnotable, as was this one, although at least that edit was made before you received many warnings. The number of grammatical issues is also pretty frustrating, so I would recommend that you really think about pivoting your edit patterns because I don't want to escalate this again. Cpotisch (talk) 09:29, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Cpotisch (talk) 03:32, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.   —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 08:03, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You've had numerous warnings about the aspects of your behavior that are problematic, see all of the above warnings that users have left on your talk page. The most troubling behaviors are persistently adding unsourced trivia to articles en masse, providing misleading edit summaries, and failing to communicate effectively when editors ask you why you're doing these things. This block will be longer than your previous block. If you continue the same behavior after the block expires, the next block will either be longer or it might be permanent. Note that competence is required to edit Wikipedia. —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 08:07, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I'm shocked that you haven't been indefinitely blocked at this point. You have removed tens of thousands of characters of content and lied about it repeatedly. Now myself and other editors are picking up the pieces. If you continue to edit after this expires, know that we'll be watching very, very closely. Cpotisch (talk) 06:11, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Cpotisch (talk) 00:11, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Original Barnstar

Contrary to the above report, I found your recent edits at 2015 New Jersey General Assembly election to be both helpful and clearly explained, and special kudos for immediately self-correcting a minor typo. Thanks for keeping your cool in the face of a spurious report. I know you have had a few troubles in the past but I am glad you have resolved to do better, and wish you the best of luck. Ping me if I can be helpful. DanCherek (talk) 02:19, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Morris County, New Jersey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mendham, New Jersey.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GigachadGigachad. Thank you for your work on 2007 United States state legislative elections. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hello! Thanks for writing this article. I encourage and hope you will write more! Have a good day!

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

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:22, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Politics of North Carolina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jeff Jackson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Elections in Virginia into Politics of Virginia. 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. — Diannaa (talk) 15:58, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GigachadGigachad. I noticed that your recent edit to Politics of Oklahoma added a link to an image on an external website or on your computer, or to a file name that does not exist on Wikipedia's server. For technical and policy reasons it is not possible to use images from external sources on Wikipedia. Most images you find on the internet are copyrighted and cannot be used on Wikipedia, or their use is subject to certain restrictions. If the image meets Wikipedia's image use policy, consider uploading it to Wikipedia yourself or request that someone else upload it. See the image tutorial to learn about wiki syntax used for images. Thank you. - Sumanuil. _{(talk to me)} 03:12, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Politics of Illinois, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bill Foster.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Politics of Louisiana into Elections in Louisiana. 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. — Diannaa (talk) 14:58, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

2012 United States presidential election in New York

added links pointing to Chris Gibson and Michael Grimm

2012 United States presidential election in Georgia

added a link pointing to John Barrow

2012 United States presidential election in Louisiana

added a link pointing to John Fleming

2012 United States presidential election in Minnesota

added a link pointing to John Kline

2012 United States presidential election in Virginia

added a link pointing to Frank Wolf

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus on the Talk page for the article has been against including a "stepped down" line to the infobox. Please bring this up on at Talk:2022 United States House of Representatives elections before readding. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 16:41, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

2018 California gubernatorial election

added links pointing to Katie Hill and Duncan Hunter

2018 United States Senate election in California

added links pointing to Katie Hill and Duncan Hunter

2014 United States Senate election in Louisiana

added a link pointing to John Fleming

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

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2014 California gubernatorial election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Steve Knight.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2012 United States Senate election in New Jersey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Franklin Township, New Jersey.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:02, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1980 United States presidential election in the District of Columbia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Edward Clark.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:35, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

2004 Vermont gubernatorial election

added a link pointing to Barre, Vermont

2006 United States Senate election in Vermont

added a link pointing to Barre, Vermont

2010 Vermont gubernatorial election

added a link pointing to Barre, Vermont

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020 United States Senate election in New Hampshire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chris Pappas.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to use Template:PresFoot where required. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:58, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

• A "bare URL and 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) 13:09, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1980 United States presidential election in Delaware, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American Party.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unnecessary information to election pages like you keep adding that some democrat was the first since since some year to win the county, that is unnecessary information so please stop adding stuff like that. 2600:1009:B158:C96E:5434:1872:DB03:5D8B (talk) 00:32, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

2004 United States Senate election in New York

added a link pointing to Albion, New York

2006 United States Senate election in New York

added a link pointing to Albion, New York

2010 United States Senate special election in New York

added a link pointing to Albion, New York

2012 United States Senate election in New York

added a link pointing to Albion, New York

2012 United States Senate election in Pennsylvania

added a link pointing to Peters Township, Pennsylvania

2016 United States Senate election in New York

added a link pointing to Albion, New York

2018 United States Senate election in New York

added a link pointing to Albion, New York

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2014 New York gubernatorial election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dan Donovan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

2006 United States House of Representatives election in Vermont

added a link pointing to St. Albans, Vermont

2008 United States House of Representatives election in Vermont

added a link pointing to St. Albans, Vermont

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

2003 United States gubernatorial elections

added a link pointing to Paul Patton

2004 United States gubernatorial elections

added a link pointing to Joe Kernan

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

2008 United States Senate elections

added links pointing to John Sununu and Gordon Smith

2002 United States gubernatorial elections

added a link pointing to Charles Turnbull

2003 United States gubernatorial elections

added a link pointing to Paul Patton

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Atlantic County, New Jersey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paul Moriarty.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As in this edit, the source is not the New jersey Legislature, it's a radio station website. And why remove details about the former districts from other articles? Alansohn (talk) 14:34, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will update the sources then. I figured the former districts would be better suited for the apportionment history sections of each legislative district, which is far more extensive. GigachadGigachad (talk) 14:36, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm UtherSRG. I noticed that you recently removed content from Jefferson Township, New Jersey without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. 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. Thanks. UtherSRG (talk) 15:21, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Township (New Jersey), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fairfield, New Jersey.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm TornadoLGS. I noticed that you recently removed content from Estell Manor, New Jersey without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. 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. Thanks. TornadoLGS (talk) 18:47, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

2000 United States Senate election in Florida

added a link pointing to Lake Butler, Florida

2004 United States Senate election in Florida

added a link pointing to Lake Butler, Florida

2012 United States Senate election in Florida

added a link pointing to Lake Butler, Florida

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

2009 New Jersey General Assembly election

added links pointing to Peter Barnes, John O'Leary, Joseph Malone and Robert Schroeder

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GigachadGigachad, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as BasedGigachad (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. Wikishovel (talk) 09:51, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do not operate multiple Wikipedia accounts. To clarify, I have no connection to other accounts like BasedGigachad. GigachadGigachad (talk) 14:30, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, who is GigachadGigachad? Could you please not just accuse me of having another account without verification? Thanks BasedGigachad (talk) 18:10, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Such as Special:Diff/1179648816. In this case, the info is both unsourced and false. Please don't do that. Elli (talk | contribs) 23:52, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited New Jersey General Assembly, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Allen.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Putting lists of elected officials into a table, as was done in this edit for Morris County, New Jersey, adds nothing for the reader and makes it harder for other editors to update. For commissioners, the names would sort by title and then first name. The Party / Residence /Term field would also not allow any meaningful sorting. Wikipedia policy prefers WP:PROSE, except where it adds something. Some time ago, one editor had started using tables in some counties based on their arbitrary preference to use tables. I'm happy to go across counties when the new commissioners and constitutional officers take office and restore the far-easier-to-read prose listings. Alansohn (talk) 00:22, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I find the tables far easier to read, as it separates out the clutter from all of the parenthesis involved. If you want, I can go back and alphabetize the list according to that format. GigachadGigachad (talk) 03:12, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:54, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article for 221st New Jersey Legislature exists and would be helpful for readers in the templates you are updating. Even though the session starting today continues until January 2026, by tradition the legislature refers to it as the 2024-2025 session (not 2024-2026). Thank you for all of your edits and I hope that these changes can be integrated going forward. Alansohn (talk) 18:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. GigachadGigachad (talk) 18:13, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

1844 United States presidential election

added a link pointing to Georgia

1848 United States presidential election

added a link pointing to Georgia

1852 United States presidential election

added a link pointing to Georgia

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Open primaries in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:01, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

1932 United States presidential election in California

added a link pointing to Humboldt, California

1960 United States presidential election in California

added a link pointing to Humboldt, California

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:58, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2012 United States presidential election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 2012 United States presidential election in Washington.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at 2014 United States House of Representatives elections. Binksternet (talk) 00:28, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The house elections edits merely state the tipping point seat, which can be found on other house pages and are calculated by looking at the closest seat that decided the majority. I have a source that I can re-add it with. GigachadGigachad (talk) 00:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tipping points require a WP:SECONDARY source.

I can see you have decided to analyze elections yourself rather than rely on the media. The guideline WP:CALC allows only basic math, not comparisons between different voting areas or different election years. If you don't have a supporting source, you should not be saying anything about a tipping point, and you should not be giving the statistics a narrative arc. Binksternet (talk) 00:57, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:51, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at 2004 United States presidential election in California. Binksternet (talk) 21:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC) There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Binksternet (talk) 04:14, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This edit to Template:NJ Bergen County Commissioners makes changes that don't take effect until January 2025, nor do the lack of sources help. This same set of changes applies to templates and articles for all 21 counties statewide, where you have in many cases removed officials who are still in office. These changes will be useful next month, but need to be properly sourced and done at the appropriate time. Alansohn (talk) 13:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]