User talk:ThirdEye96

Hello, @ThirdEye96! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. I wanted to reach out to you to explain why I twice reverted your addition of reciprocal killings to the Assassination of Charlie Kirk article. In short, I do not see this event as being notable enough to be included on Wikipedia. You can see the notability guidelines yourself at WP:N. More specifically though, I don't see either of the attached sources being enough to qualify this event for inclusion. While CNN is considered a reliable source (see WP:CNN), the article itself does not mention Charlie Kirk or his assassination once and does not allege that the killing was tied Kirk's assassination. This would mean that inclusion on this page would be an example of original research and synthesis, both of which are discouraged on Wikipedia. I would not consider NJ101.5 to be a reliable source because it seems to have more in common with a tabloid or sensationalist news source, and in particular because of the poor grammar and subject material. In short, if you do want to readd this event, I suggest you find more sources (preferably >3) that directly tie this event to Kirk's assassination. Given that the driver's identity hasn't even been confirmed by the police though, I feel you will have significant trouble doing so. Instead, it may be possible for you to try to turn it into a standalone article through the normal Articles for Creation process. Thanks, and happy editing! guninvalid (talk) 06:12, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, 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 an expanded level of powers and discretion 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 practices;
• 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.

Isabelle Belato ^🏳‍🌈 10:49, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Please explain here your unilateral move without engaging the consensus reached on talk. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:05, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

The article naming issues have been discussed on talk at length; you didn't participate. Your move was disruptive; see the explanation by Swatjester. If you do something like that again, it will need to be called to the attention of administrators on a noticeboard. Please engage in talk discussions before again moving the article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:42, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi ThirdEye96. Thank you for your work on 2025 Ternopil apartment strike. 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 a source for "The strike was one of the deadliest in Western Ukraine since the start of the Russo-Ukrainian war." 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) 13:05, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Bella Coola grizzly bear attack. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and please see WP:NEVENT. 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. MediaKyle (talk) 20:01, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Odanr. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Nuno Loureiro, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Odanr (she/it) (talk) 03:49, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi ThirdEye96! I noticed that you've made several edits in order to restore your preferred version of Denny Hamlin. 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 at Talk:Denny Hamlin, 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. Thank you. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 17:32, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Also, please keep in mind that communication is required, not optional on Wikipedia. You are expected to engage with others when they express concerns to you. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 17:34, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:Explosions in 2026 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:21, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Please do not edit war on article, particularly featured articles, as you did here. Furthermore, it was untruthful to claim that no valid reason was given when you edit warred: a valid reason was given. If you don't agree with it, then use the article talk page to discuss, per WP:BRD. While the discussion continues, the WP:STATUS QUO should remain in place on the article. - SchroCat (talk) 05:17, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

This edit you made seems to have broken the page, as the edit before this shows the map fine. However, now the map page on the top right is broken. Are you able to fix this ASAP? I'm not sure why this happened. Wikieditor662 (talk) 03:05, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I do not know what caused this. I had reverted my own edit thinking that it had caused it, however the problem persisted which led me to believe it had not, so I added my edit back. ThirdEye96 (talk) 03:10, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I just undid the edit that seemed to cause the problem but it didn't fix the page. I don't know what's went wrong. ThirdEye96 (talk) 03:23, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

The edit was my own. ThirdEye96 (talk) 03:24, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I managed to fix the map (I think). OhKayeSierra (talk) 03:26, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you and I'm sorry. ThirdEye96 (talk) 03:26, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

No worries, thanks for your help! Wikieditor662 (talk) 04:49, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Nil NZ. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you unlinked one or more redlinks. Redlinks are useful and can often be helpful, so we don't remove them just because they are red. They help improve Wikipedia by attracting editors to create needed articles.

In addition, clicking on the "What links here" link (in the tools listed at the left in desktop view) on a missing article shows how many—and which—articles depend on that article being created. This can help prioritize article creation. Please only remove a redlink if you are reasonably sure that it is to a non-notable topic and not likely to warrant creation in the foreseeable future. Thanks! nil ^nz 21:25, 7 March 2026 (UTC)