User talk:Jelloistired

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Rokusaburo Michiba, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. See MOS:OVERLINK. CodeTalker (talk) 21:50, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Ive never editted Rokusaburo Michiba, perhaps you have the wrong person? Jelloistired (talk) 17:24, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

The edit history shows that you made this edit. CodeTalker (talk) 18:19, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

oh I see, do you mind telling me what I did wrong? Jelloistired (talk) 00:08, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

The error was linking "Japan"; we do not normally link country names. See MOS:OVERLINK for more details on what should not be linked. Thanks! CodeTalker (talk) 00:15, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

no problem I'll try to keep that in mind next time thanks! Jelloistired (talk) 01:49, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. An edit war occurs when two or more users begin repeatedly reverting content on a page in a back-and-forth fashion to restore it back to how they think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree with their changes. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or undo the edits made by other editors when your changes are reverted. Instead, please use the talk page to work toward creating a version of the page that represents consensus among the editors involved. The best practice at this time is to stop editing the page and to discuss the disagreements, issues, and concerns at-hand with the other editors involved in the dispute. Wikipedia provides a page that helps to detail how this is accomplished. If discussions reach an impasse, you can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection while a discussion to resolve the dispute is ongoing.

Continuing to engage in further edit warring behavior can result in being blocked from editing Wikipedia—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, or whether it involves the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also, please keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your demeanor, behavior, or conduct indicate that you intend to continue repeatedly making reverts to the page. Onorem (talk) 22:12, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Jelloistired! I noticed that you've made several edits in order to restore your preferred version of an article. The impulse to repeatedly undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure that you're aware of Wikipedia's edit warring policy. Repeatedly undoing the changes made by other users in a back-and-forth fashion like this is disallowed, even if you feel what you're doing is justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages in order to try to reach a consensus with the other editors involved. If you are unable to come to an agreement, please use one of the dispute resolution options that are available in order to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of repeatedly reverting other editors' changes can help you avoid getting drawn into edit wars. Be advised, you're currently past Three Reverts within 24 Hours, a red-line breach of the policy on edit-warring. Given you've never been made aware of this before you won't likely be reprimanded for it, but repeatedly adding poor sources to an article regarding a WP:BLP subject and a contentious topic is a quick way to earn a block.. Rambling Rambler (talk) 22:18, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@Jelloistired in response to the message left on my talk page about where to find reliable sources, Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources is a good place to start. Rambling Rambler (talk) 22:29, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

--Tryptofish (talk) 22:19, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

I've started a discussion at Talk:Assassination of Charlie Kirk#Candace Owens and the leaked text chat, where I've tried to summarize the issues about content. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:33, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Jelloistired! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

If you have questions, just use this link to ask for help; a volunteer will visit you here shortly!

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! --Orgullomoore (talk) 23:59, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

I had a look at your contributions and your user page (and your recent edit to Nerd, regarding which see below). Just make sure you are here to build an encyclopedia. If you're just here to make fun of people who edit Wikipedia or push particular points of view, that's not allowed, and you will likely be blocked pretty quickly. On the other hand, if you're here to help us build a free, neutral encyclopedia, which I presume is the case, then you're most welcome. --Orgullomoore (talk) 00:10, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Nerd. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. TheAlienAdventures (talk) 00:02, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

@TheAlienAdventures

hello! there is an issue with my sandbox and that is i dont know where the hell to find it. Jelloistired (talk) 00:27, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

It's not created yet. You can go to and start editing it. You are free to put in there (mostly) whatever you want. See Wikipedia:About the sandbox for more details. --Orgullomoore (talk) 00:33, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi Jelloistired! I noticed that you recently made an edit and marked it as "minor", but it may not have been. On Wikipedia, "minor edit" refers only to superficial edits that could never be disputed, such as fixing typos or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not minor, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. Lovelyfurball (talk) 15:39, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm PARAKANYAA. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:23, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

My edit was constructive. I changed the introduction to reflect reality, If you are racist, on behalf of all wikipedians, please keep that off the site. Thank you! Jelloistired (talk) 23:26, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

WP:Verifiability, WP:reliable sources. Just because you think WP:IDONTLIKEIT does not mean you can remove it.

All material you add to Wikipedia must be backed up by a source somewhere in the article. You removed material cited to the sources in the body of the article, and added unsourced information. Please stop. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:28, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Secondly, you're really going to argue that George Lincoln Rockwell was not racist? Really? PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:29, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

@PARAKANYAA I kept that section in the article. Please you your eyeballs while making edits!

Sincerely, Jelloistired Jelloistired (talk) 23:33, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Then why are you arguing that white power is not racist? PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:34, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

@PARAKANYAA because it is not. Just because one white individual is/was racist, does not make all white people racist. If you need more info, please check your brain in the Common sense section!

Sincerely, Jelloistired Jelloistired (talk) 23:36, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Because the creator of a term was a white supremacist and all users of the term are white supremacists does in fact mean that the term is white supremacist! It does not follow that all white people are white supremacist.

The sources say it, we say it. Please stop WP:POVPUSHING. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:40, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

@PARAKANYAA I removed unsourced content that would be considered racist. please read the article, racist, and try not to include hateful wording against groups of people. I hope we can work together to make a better wikipedia.

Sincerely, @Jelloistired Jelloistired (talk) 23:32, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

The content was sourced. Please read WP:LEAD. The lead is a summary of the article and does not contain citations. You did not add any citations to the article for your assertion that it is not white supremacist, which is a very WP:FRINGE idea. It is only used by white supremacists/nationalists. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:35, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:White power. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. StephenMacky1 (talk) 14:09, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

@Jelloistired, actually the warning applies more for this talk page, since you called an editor racist for disagreeing with your personal opinions. StephenMacky1 (talk) 14:13, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

I did not call him racist, I said, "If you are racist" Jelloistired (talk) 14:24, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Sure, you did not. I removed unsourced content that would be considered racist. please read the article, racist, and try not to include hateful wording against groups of people. I hope we can work together to make a better wikipedia. Conduct yourself better next time, especially if you do not want to end up in trouble. StephenMacky1 (talk) 17:31, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

I suppose I could have worded that better, I meant "Please read the article titled racist" I was not calling you a racist. I can see how you would view it as that and I apologize for causing a misunderstanding. Jelloistired (talk) 17:32, 9 March 2026 (UTC)