User talk:Eduardog3000

Hi, maybe I'm wrong, but I think that Sanders 2020 logo is a bit darker than the 2016 version, as you can see here. -- Nick.mon (talk) 22:23, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

His logo comes in a lot of color combinations, that one is just on his store. Unfortunately the only copies of the logo hosted on his website right now are that one which has been up for a while, and was edited from the original to be a store logo, and the one on the homepage which is all white. His announcement videos actually used an alternate version where "Bernie" is blue but the top stripe is white and the middle is transparent.^[1] We should wait for official campaign material to start coming out. The 2016 SVG is actually from a Flyer PDF from his site. --eduardog3000 (talk) 22:32, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

@Nick.mon: Ok, I actually found a recent SVG copy of his logo on his campaign signup page.^[2] It does have different colors, so I've uploaded it as File:Bernie_Sanders_2020_logo.svg. --eduardog3000 (talk) 23:14, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Great, thank you so much! -- Nick.mon (talk) 12:38, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

I noticed that you reverted my edits to the 2020 Democratic Primaries election article. I have found many reliable third-party sources reporting Beto O’Rourke’s official announcement today regarding his run and campaign for presidency. Thanks Mrbeastmodeallday (talk) 04:37, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

He hasn't announced quite yet. He is currently listed in a section for candidates who have scheduled announcements, with sources for that. Once he actually announces later today (probably wait until he posts something about it to social media, or if you get an email from him confirming it) you can move him to the table. Please try to keep with the format of the table, and use the "Show preview" button instead of Publishing the changes then correcting mistakes afterward. --eduardog3000 (talk) 04:46, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

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-1932 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.

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.

- MrX 🖋 16:19, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Eduardog3000.Y ou are only allowed to make on revert in 24 hours on 2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries. You made two. I'm not sure why you ignored the prominent notice at the top of the editing window, but please don't do it again or you may be blocked from editing or topic banned.- MrX 🖋 16:24, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, that slipped my mind as those were in different waking periods. I'll be more careful about that. --eduardog3000 (talk) 18:05, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

I wanted to apologize to you for briefly deleting your controversy section on Draft: Joshua Collins. The section has validity, and I have re-added it with some small edits. I am also personally sympathetic to the Collins campaign, though trying to keep this bias out of my edits as best as I can. I have been on enough political pages recently that have had unnecessary controversy sections added, and have gotten into a habit of purging them. However, I never want to become one of the people who just deletes things off Wikipedia. (They're one of the things I don't like on here.) So, I apologize for deleting your valid edit, I have done my best to correct it, and thank you for making the Wikipedia community better. PickleG13 (talk) 21:28, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

@PickleG13: All good, the edits you just made to it are pretty good imo. --eduardog3000 (talk) 21:30, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of MPs elected in the 2019 United Kingdom general election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mike Hill. 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) 06:14, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Super Thursday (disambiguation), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 2011 United Kingdom elections.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:52, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

an ARCA clarified a doubt in the area.

The 30 day / 500 restriction (often dubbed Arbpia) is on the talk page notice and on another one that you see when you edit an article falling under those sanctions. If you are not extended confirmed (30/500) then you can't take part in formal discussions about that article (so, RFC, RM, AfD and so on).

A pain. Get your 500/30 and you can stop worrying about it.Selfstudier (talk) 17:35, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

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 the Balkans or Eastern Europe. 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.

TylerBurden (talk) 15:24, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Cambial — foliar❧ 20:37, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

I really appreciate that you found my comments on Talk:2023 Israel-Hamas war helpful. I see that my post has since been deleted per ARBPIA, but you are welcome to take them from the talk page history and post them under your own name, with or without attribution! Thanks again, and sorry to clutter your talk page :) WillowCity (talk) 17:30, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

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 Uyghurs, Uyghur genocide, or topics that are related to Uyghurs or Uyghur genocide. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. 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.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 22:47, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

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. Contentious topics are the successor to the former discretionary sanctions system, which you may be aware of. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. For a summary of difference between the former and new system, see WP:CTVSDS. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 22:55, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Kite Man Hell Yeah!.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:20, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Kite Man Hell Yeah!.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:22, 30 April 2024 (UTC)