User talk:TJ Kreen

Welcome to Wikipedia, Communism is cringe! Thank you for your contributions. This is an encyclopedia, so remember that it's a necessity to include references listing reliable websites, newspapers, articles, books and other sources you have used to write or expand articles. Please understand that these sources should verify the information in a fair and accurate manner. However, you must not copy and paste text you find anywhere, except for short quotations, marked as such with quote marks and carefully cited to the source the quote was taken from. New articles and statements added to existing articles may be deleted by others if unreferenced or referenced poorly or if they are copyright violations. See referencing for beginners for more details.

I am R Prazeres and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page.

Here are some more pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! R Prazeres (talk) 19:35, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for telling me! I’ll make sure to add sources from now on. Communism is cringe (talk) 19:52, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for contributing to the article Battle of Ordashu. However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. Please help by adding more sources to the article you edited, and/or by clarifying how the sources already given support the claims (see here for how to do inline referencing). If you need further help, you can look at Help:Menu/Editing Wikipedia, or ask at the Teahouse, or just ask me. Thank you. Dormskirk (talk) 10:28, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Check the article for the Anglo-Ashanti wars and go to the tab for the third war Communism is cringe (talk) 13:22, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

There, you’ll find my sources for the edit Communism is cringe (talk) 13:22, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

An article you recently created, Battle of Ikotobo, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Dan arndt (talk) 02:24, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Oh, my bad. I meant to put it as a draft. TJ Kreen (talk) 02:42, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Consider this a vandalism warning for posting on a blocked users page. Don't do that. Knitsey (talk) 21:00, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

I apologize. But for reference, I explore you to say “please” in the future. I.e, “Please don’t do that” instead of “Don’t do that”. The latter makes you sound less reasonable and more authoritarian. Please keep in mind that I simply say this not to mock or belittle you, but so you can learn from this in the future. TJ Kreen (talk) 21:08, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Also, I wish you the best for your surgical recovery. TJ Kreen (talk) 21:09, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

You didn't get a template message because I was being polite as you have 500+ edits. You didn't get a please because you have 500+ edits and should know better. Encouraging an LTA account to vandalise does not earn a please. Knitsey (talk) 21:18, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

I understand. TJ Kreen (talk) 21:19, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Battle of Kef (1705) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 14:30, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Only one source mentions the battle (the source I used), so I’m stuck at a crossroads. TJ Kreen (talk) 21:13, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi, unfortunately one source would not be enough to show notability for a battle. So if no other sources exist it just doesn't meet the current guidelines for inclusion. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 22:58, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I understand. But couldn’t it be accepted with the “Relies on one source” disclaimer? TJ Kreen (talk) 00:10, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Sorry no not in this case. Most subjects have to show they meet WP:GNG which usually means 3+ good sources. Things that can just have one source are where another guideline exists where the consensus is a subject is inherently notable and then you need just one source to show they meet that. Examples are politicians at high levels (WP:NPOL), and extant species (see Wikipedia:Notability (species)). For historic battles there is no specific guideline - but there is an advice page from the Military History WikiProject - See Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Notability guide. You may like to ask that project for advice, someone may know of more sources - ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 09:02, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! TJ Kreen (talk) 11:56, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Hey, TJKreen! Re your user, which says I’ve grown resentful of teachers saying the phrase: “Wikipedia isn’t a reliable source”. I’ve come here to change this fact, one edit at a time. I will work tirelessly to make this a reality, no matter how long or how grueling the process proves to be.

FWIW, Wikipedia doesn't consider Wikipedia a reliable source.

A Wikipedia article, ideally, is a curated list of reliable sources (the references) about a subject, with an accurate summarization (the article) of what those sources say. Teachers should be telling students that WP is a good place to start, but they're quite correct that a Wikipedia article itself shouldn't be cited. The sources Wikipedia cites are what students should be using, not Wikipedia. Wikipedia articles can be edited by anyone, so even at our very best articles, errors can creep in over time. Valereee (talk) 11:16, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you for the message. Would you prefer that I change it or is it fine the way it is? TJ Kreen (talk) 14:43, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with having that opinion, just wanted to let you know. Valereee (talk) 23:13, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Ah, I understand now. Thank you for your input. (Not sarcastic) TJ Kreen (talk) 00:37, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello there

There has been extensive discussion about including the various names for WWI in the first sentence of the lead. Please see the article Talk pages about this. It's also not a good idea to write in your edit summary that your changed are "minor" when your are changing content and others might object to these changes. A minor edit usually refers to changing obvious spelling mistakes and other minor corrections that no one is likely to object to. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 01:03, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. I apologize if I came across as misleading. TJ Kreen (talk) 01:23, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Government of National Salvation. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:23, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

FYI, the last discussion on this issue in the talk page archives is here Talk:Government of National Salvation/Archive 1#Infobox 2. Also, see Territory of the Military Commander in Serbia for the legal status of what was clearly an occupied territory under German military administration, and reliable sources on that. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:36, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, sorry I didn’t respond sooner. TJ Kreen (talk) 23:41, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Draft:Battle of Ikotobo requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.noonans.co.uk/auctions/archive/past-catalogues/726/catalogue/477753/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. REAL_MOUSE_IRL talk 10:20, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

I understand. I was not aware of this rule, and will remove the material immediately. TJ Kreen (talk) 12:51, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

…Nevermind, you deleted it not even three hours later, and didn’t even give me a chance to remove it. TJ Kreen (talk) 12:52, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Battle of Irmen. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and require WP:RS, WP:IS. 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. QEnigma 论 17:31, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know.

Cheers! :) TJ Kreen (talk) 20:23, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

On September 11, you added {{sfn|Knight|2013|p=8}}. There is no reference by Knight that is dated 2013. If you could correct this sfn cite, the article would no longer be in Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors. I've come across a bit of an oddity... "Zulu War 1879 - twilight of a warrior nation" is available through the Internet Archive. This is a 1992 Praeger Illustrated History book and its cover & title page clearly state that it has two authors - Ian Knight and Ian Castle. Then in the 2003/Osprey/Essential Histories "The Zulu War, 1879" Ian Knight is rendered as the only author. Two different books with almost identical titles or just different publishers of the same material... Confusing to me anyway. - Shearonink (talk) 05:11, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for informing me of this. TJ Kreen (talk) 21:46, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by RangersRus was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Sources are too old. WP:AGEMATTERS

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Battle of Kef (1705) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

RangersRus (talk) 13:10, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. TJ Kreen (talk) 13:18, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Rabih War (1899–1901). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. 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. Tenshi! (Talk page) 15:51, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Battle of Irmen, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Absurdum4242 (talk) 01:21, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Excuse my unprofessional statement below:

YES, LETS GOOOOO!

(Sorry, just had to get it out of my system). TJ Kreen (talk) 01:22, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Battle of Monterrey (1840). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. 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. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 22:57, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you TJ Kreen (talk) 22:58, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I've noticed your contributions to articles on the Paraguayan War. Before you continue, I would suggest you please read MOS:RL and WP:RED. Cheers, Coeusin (talk) 21:02, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate the advice!

Cheers! TJ Kreen (talk) 07:51, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

I noticed that you had changed <br /> to <br> but the last I saw of it was that <br /> was the right one. Has anything changed? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 09:55, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, as far as I know/am aware, both are acceptable, but the latter is the one which is generally preferred. TJ Kreen (talk) 12:15, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your recent edits to Capture of the schooner Peruviana when you modified the page, you introduced unknown parameters. Just because you specify |some_param=some_variable does not always mean that variable will display. The |some_param= must be defined in the template. You can look at the documentation for the template you are using but it is also helpful to use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and ensure that the values you have added are displaying correctly. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it. It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 02:47, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, I’m currently in the process of editing it. TJ Kreen (talk) 02:49, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

Please remember that you have been told multiple times that Wikipedia works on the basis of information directly drawn from reliable sources only. So you are not in a position to make uncited claims – including about alleged historical flags, which require verification like anything else – unless you are citing those sources clearly. Also, in case this is part of the confusion, both the "reliable sources" policy and the "no original research" policy explain what counts as reliable; so it's more than merely the presence of any citation: it has to be reliable and relevant (for example, for history articles, peer-reviewed works by academic historians are expected). Among other things, primary sources usually do not count, as they require academic interpretation, which should not be done by Wikipedia editors themselves. These kinds of reverts, where you re-impose your own edit and demand that the other editor(s) satisfy you instead, are therefore non-constructive, in addition to being edit-warring. I hope this makes things clearer. Thanks, R Prazeres (talk) 22:24, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

“Where you re-impose your own edit and demand that the other editor(s) satisfy you instead” is such a harsh assessment of the situation that it becomes blatantly untrue. TJ Kreen (talk) 22:42, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

In addition, I was not “demanding”, I was simply requesting for reasons that the flags were fictional. And if I was demanding by asking about the credibility of flags, you have been doing it FAR longer than I have. TJ Kreen (talk) 22:48, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war, according to the reverts you've made to Zayyanid Capture of Sijilmasa (1264). This means that you are repeatedly reverting content back to how you think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree. Once it is known that there is a disagreement, users are expected to collaborate with others, avoid editing disruptively, and try to reach a consensus – rather than repeatedly reverting the changes made by other users.

Important points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive behavior – regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not engage in edit warring – even if you believe that you are right.

You need to discuss the disagreement on the article's talk page and work towards a revision that represents consensus among everyone involved. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution if discussions reach an impasse. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to engage in edit warring, you may be blocked from editing. R Prazeres (talk) 17:52, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Please don't add links when there isn't an article for it, also please don't shorten names if its not needed. In fact you should always try to use the full name of the person. But your some of your edits are appreciated by me. Thank you. Syazwi Irfan (talk) 16:52, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for telling me. TJ Kreen (talk) 17:30, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

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

• A URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters contains an invalid URL. Please edit the article to add the valid URL. (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) 03:02, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi TJ Kreen. Thank you for your work on Russo-Kokand war. Another editor, Mariamnei, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for your work on this article. Please add more sources and footnotes to back up each claim with a reliable source. Please also establish notability as per WP:NEVENT and fix the errors in footnotes 1 and 3. Thanks and have a good day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Mariamnei}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Mariamnei (talk) 09:22, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, TJ Kreen. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Rabih War (1899–1901), a page you created, has not been edited in at least five 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) 21:08, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Battle of the Irtysh, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Absurdum4242 (talk) 13:44, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Cool TJ Kreen (talk) 21:19, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Battle of Didgori, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Demetrius I was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 21:17, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, TJ Kreen. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Rabih War".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:29, 22 March 2026 (UTC)