User talk:Friedbyrd

Hello, Friedbyrd, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to Treaty of Fort Jackson does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Questions page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  GenQuest ^"scribble" 18:27, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Hey, I’m sorry, but how exactly did my edit violate the NPOV? I just linked to the United States in the Infobox for that edit. Thanks. Friedbyrd (talk) 18:35, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Friedbyrd. NPOV and WEIGHT also have to be considered when dealing with IB flags. Please read these parts I linked to of the MoS. Basically, there are few instances where flags should go in an InfoBox. People get carried away, and use them as decorations—nothing that conveys more information. It's a constant battle to fix these. Number one: if flags are in a military-type IB for opposing forces, then all armies involved must have a flag, or the IB becomes weighted against the flagless entities. Weighted entries upset the Neutral Point of View. Best to avoid adding flags at all, unless you're writing a new article that requires them. Hope that helps. Regards, GenQuest ^"scribble" 19:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for trying to make Wikipedia a NPOV site, but you are up against a high wall. If you try to make it NPV from the left, you will eventually be banned. 2603:8080:3EF0:68F0:74F6:5255:382D:A39D (talk) 22:35, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Acroterion (talk) 13:19, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

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. Acroterion (talk) 13:19, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mansfield Lovell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York. 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, 2 May 2025 (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. Additionally, editors must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert on the same page within 24 hours for pages within this topic. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 14:35, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

You need to revert your change to the Zohran Mamdani article, it is a clear violation of the WP:1RR, which covers any material about the Israel-Palestine conflict anywhere. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 14:36, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

By the book, any admin might have blocked Friedbyrd for edit warring on a CT. Be aware any other admin might still choose to block for the same behavior. Heed this warning, Friedbyrd. The Mamdani page is not one where you'd want to push boundaries. BusterD (talk) 14:57, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Hey, you're now at 1100 words in that talk section for Zohran Mamdani. that section is covered by the PIA sanction Bluethricecreamman (talk) 20:46, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Magnolia677. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Ripley, Mississippi, but you didn't provide a reliable source. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation, your edit is archived in the page history. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:25, 5 December 2025 (UTC)