User Talk: TheAnomynousEditor

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

January 2026

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Hi TheAnomynousEditor! 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 typo ↗s 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.  '''MossOnALog'''Talk 22:38, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

:Sorry about that I will deal with it eventually. TheAnomynousEditor (talk) 22:46, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Hello. Thank you for your contributions ↗ to Wikipedia ↗. I noticed that one or more recent edits you made did not have an edit summary ↗. Collaboration among editors is fundamental to Wikipedia, and every edit should be explained by a clear edit summary ↗, or by discussion on the talk page ↗. Please use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit or to describe what it changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief ↗.

The edit summary field looks like this:
{{Edit summary field/OOUI}}

or in the visual editor:
{{Edit summary field/VisualEditor}}

{{strong|Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make.}} When logged in to your Wikipedia account ↗, you can give yourself a reminder by setting {{myprefs|3|check={{int:tog-forceeditsummary}}}}, and then click the "{{int:saveprefs}}" button.
Thanks!{{sp}} '''MossOnALog'''Talk 22:38, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Hello, I'm MossOnALog. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, 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.  '''MossOnALog'''Talk 22:39, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

30px|alt=Stop icon ↗ '''You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war ↗, according to the reverts you've made to :River Ivel ↗.''' 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:
# {{strong|Edit warring is disruptive behavior ↗ – regardless of how many reverts you have made;}}
# {{strong|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 ↗. {{strong|If you continue to engage in edit warring, you may be blocked ↗ from editing.}}  '''MossOnALog'''Talk 23:31, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

:My sources are reliable I added a new paragraph about conservation efforts showing the conservation's website on what they do. I added more evidence from the Hertfordshire council and Ea (Environment Agency). If there are any concerns or problems please reply I apologise for any disruption-will deal with it in the future. TheAnomynousEditor (talk) 07:35, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

30px|alt=Stop icon ↗ You may be '''blocked from editing ↗ without further warning''' the next time you use Wikipedia for promotion or advertising ↗, as you did at :River Ivel ↗. {{PAGENAME}} ↗ 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:08, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

:I understand the concerns about tone and sourcing and will step back from editing while reviewing the relevant guidelines. TheAnomynousEditor (talk) 09:19, 24 January 2026 (UTC)
::I would also advise you to stop usinga an LLM (for example "AI chatbots") for editing Wikipedia. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 12:03, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

River and Geography articles

Hello, excited to see another user care about geography. As someone with 1.5 years+ of geography article experience I wanted to share some with you. I invite you to peruse my user page and its subpages and see my sources and map collections. Both to see some of what is possible to find and to know what to look for in the area of your geographic interest. Also since you are interested in rivers, a few watersheds I have worked extensively on are as follows: Nodaway River ↗, Platte River ↗, and even my detailed research of a small river system Tarkio River notes.

Hope this helps and is interesting. I imagine UK has different formatting and content expectations for river articles, so try to find a good quality and complete river system as a template to copy from when working on other rivers. Thanks SamuelNelsonGISP (talk) 14:39, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

:Thank you @SamuelNelsonGISP I appreciate it very much 😁. Since you told me that you edited geography-related articles for over 1.5 years, I got a userbox for your userpage that I made it so whenever someone sees your userpage, it will show: {{User enjoys geography ↗}}. (copy paste it and put it on your userpage) I hope you enjoy this Userbox!👍 TheAnomynousEditor (talk) 17:55, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

Please stop opening multiple sections on talk pages for the same article

You've opened up three sections on WT:FAC ↗, two sections on WT:GAN ↗, and numerous sections elsewhere, all asking variants of the same question about River Ivel ↗. I'd suggest just nominating the article and waiting for a reviewer. Thanks, ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:57, 5 July 2026 (UTC)