User talk:Avocadopiu

Hello, Avocadopiu. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:George William Robertson, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:40, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Avocadopiu! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 14:17, Saturday, July 15, 2023 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Avocadopiu/Damiga requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ScalarFactor (talk) 18:43, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Antônio da Silva Prado. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources and it needs more sources to establish notability. 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 the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 10:34, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

I can't add citations when in translating the page on mobile, I can only do so after when I'm editing the translated page, is there a specific time limit I need to add citations in? Avocadopiu (talk) 10:58, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

Nope, you can work on the draft and submit it for review. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 11:14, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

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! CREditzWiki, editor (talk) 15:51, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Most veteran editors of the site don't really use edit summaries. For example, User:Torimem. Besides, most of my edits are not controversial and credited with a source, I only do edit summaries for controversial edits such as this one Avocadopiu (talk) 15:58, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

My mistake. I am not a veteran editor, and did not know of this. I will keep this in mind when I leave this in the future. Thank you! CREditzWiki, editor (talk) 16:25, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

It's fine to be steadfast in your beliefs, but if they're not widely accepted, don't force them upon others. Besides, everybody has their own style and opinions. Adding edit summaries, no matter how short, still take time, especially if you're completely revamping or creating a page. I tried to add in edit summaries at first, but as my passion for Wikipedia grew, I made more and more edits and realized somewhere in reworking the First Brazilian Republic, that I was losing a lot of time by adding in edit summaries for each of the edits I was doing. Avocadopiu (talk) 06:21, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Actually, no, you really should include edit summaries when you delete large amounts of text as you did here and here. You may think it's "obvious" why you did something, but to other editors and administrators it may look like vandalism, particularly if you are deleting sources and content with references. The edit summaries can be simple like "copy edit" and "expand" or "remove unreliable sources" but removing reliable sources without checking them just for "speed" is not acceptable. Cielquiparle (talk) 06:25, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes, those were mistakes. For smaller and uncontroversial edits I'd generally assume good faith. Avocadopiu (talk) 07:17, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Antonio Rodríguez Ramírez, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page El Comercio. 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) 19:55, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Third Militarism is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Borsoka -- Borsoka (talk) 13:06, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Please use edit summaries when editing. Please see WP:EDITSUM if you need help. Cielquiparle (talk) 06:33, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Good article nominations | June 2026 Backlog Drive
June 2026 Backlog Drive: Do you want to become more experienced in the GA process? On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles reviewed. Mentors are available, and new reviewers (<6 reviews) get bonus points! Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talk page.
You're receiving this message because you have participated in a good article review this year or participated in the previous backlog drive.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:58, 25 May 2026 (UTC)