User talk:Ernio48

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! KennethSides (talk) 13:11, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Aloha from Hawaii, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. SummerPhD (talk) 13:40, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Lady Gaga, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Some of your vandalism can appear in the Google searches and we don't want that. Thebirdlover (talk) 20:33, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Regarding your edits to Sex symbol, please bear in mind WP:CIRCULAR, which states that Wikipedia cannot be used as a form of self-reference in its articles. Thank you. SuperMarioMan 22:10, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article John Sciortino has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. --Non-Dropframe _talk 22:23, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One of your additions to Donna Summer has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. (If you are the copyright holder, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material without verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. This message relates to this edit, where content from Billboard was copied without attribution or paraphrasing. For help on how to use existing content and referencing, see Wikipedia:Plagiarism. matt (talk) 13:53, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ernio48, this addition is absolutely full of errors in grammar, and goes into way too much detail. I don't know where to even begin with culling this entry, and I have other things to do IRL today: but it needs serious work, and it will be have to be edited extensively. I think that you are operating in good faith, but you are simply adding far too many mistakes and far too much unnecessary detail to this article concerning Donna Summer's death. Please do not be offended if I or any other editor changes what you have added in a significant manner, and we can all go to the talk page when that happens. Cheers :> Doc talk 12:21, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On 26–27 June 2012, you added considerable material on Dusty Springfield. Much of it is improperly formatted, contains poorly defined refs and information which is either redundant or overly detailed with trivial facts. The article was a recent GA candidate. I have reverted all of the added material pending better expression, formatting and relevance. Please work on any additional content and modify it to meet the standard already shown by the article. If you have any concerns about this matter raise them at the article's talkpage for discussion.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 21:50, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You recently falsified a ref in the list of languages by native speakers. Fraudulent edits are reason for a block. Please don't do it again. — kwami (talk) 12:48, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

His edits in the Holy Roman Empire article are also fraudulent... Domen von Wielkopolska (talk) 23:35, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Just a quick note about date formats. Pls check the policy at WP:MOSDATE regarding date ranges. A couple of the changes you have recently made a contrary to the required format. Cheers. Anotherclown (talk) 21:14, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ernest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ernst (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:36, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of former German colonies, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page German (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:08, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stadtschloss, Berlin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Friedrich III (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:58, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Germans, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Henry IV (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 12:49, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Joseph Goebbels may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Great power you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Retrolord -- Retrolord (talk) 11:07, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Germans may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ] or any other persons with a German forebear, who came to modern Germany after 1955.</ref><ref>[https://www.destatis.de/DE/PresseService/Presse/Pressekonferenzen/2013/Zensus2011/bevoelkerung_
• | 74,050,320<ref>[https://www.destatis.de/DE/PresseService/Presse/Pressekonferenzen/2013/Zensus2011/bevoelkerung_

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:45, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Germans, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Plurality (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:53, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just a heads up about this edit - it may get reverted because of Talk:Germans/Archive 6#Article scope. That seen - I personally like the changes and have said so on the talk page. -- Moxy (talk) 19:33, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to know according to which criteria the article "Great power" has been named good article.It seems really original like also the article "Potential superpowers" that has inside even Brazil and Russia.I'm really curious.Glc72 (talk) 15:57, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Great power you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Great power for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 17:22, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Germans, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lorraine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:52, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of German monarchs may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ', [[King of Italy]]. After this he would ride on to Rome and be crowned emperor by the pope. See [[Coronation of the Holy Roman Emperor for more details.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:51, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Protestantism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Congregationalism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:54, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the List of Christian denominations by number of members page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

can you atleast use the exact same colours in the svg as in the png version? 103.15.233.149 (talk) 00:24, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am able to edit the map, but there's no point in doing that.

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Protestant Reformation page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:35, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Protestantism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Italian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:52, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would ask that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on Holy Roman Empire. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia.
Your dispute with Yopie on the Holy Roman Empire has resulted in your having an edit war. You nearly violated the Three revert rule. Next time, simply discuss your problem on the talk page. Another reversion will result in a report to the Administrators Noticeboard -- Orduin ^⋠T⋡ 02:12, 25 November 2014 (UTC) -- Orduin ^⋠T⋡ 02:12, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Catholic Church, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page English Church. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:58, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Protestantism by country, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Episcopalians. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:26, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of the largest Protestant churches, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prussian Union. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:57, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Protestantism page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:28, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have answered your ctitics regarding muliethnicity. If you believe that the article needs additional information, please edit it. I'm not able to do it because of my poor English.Xx236 (talk) 09:30, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo,
Wir brauchen weitere Nutzer, welche sich an dieser Diskussion beteiligen!
We need further users, who participate in this discussion! --37ophiuchi (talk) 14:08, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Protestantism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Unitarians. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:06, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Protetant reformations: Ernio, Slovakia and Slovaks in the 16th - 17th centuries were the par of the Kingdom of Hungary (You cannot identify today ethnical Hungarioan state with a multi-national kingdom of the past.) So information on the reformation among Slovaks should be historically correctly included in the scetion on the reformation in Hungary. Creating a special section for Slovakia woudl be ahistorical. If there is a mention about reformation in Slovene lands and Primož Trubar and about a reformation in Greece, there is no reason to exclude Jiri Tranovský (Tranoscius). — Preceding unsigned comment added by HK9900 (talk • contribs) 17:27, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Protetant reformations: Ernio, Slovakia and Slovaks in the 16th - 17th centuries were the par of the Kingdom of Hungary (You cannot identify today ethnical Hungarioan state with a multi-national kingdom of the past.) So information on the reformation among Slovaks should be historically correctly included in the scetion on the reformation in Hungary. Creating a special section for Slovakia woudl be ahistorical. If there is a mention about reformation in Slovene lands and Primož Trubar and about a rehttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ernio48&action=edit&section=new#formation in Greece, there is no reason to exclude Jiri Tranovský (Tranoscius). HK9900 (talk) 17:28, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Americans page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am off to sleep, I will answer in AM. regards--Woogie10w (talk) 00:22, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anti-Protestantism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Poland-Lithuania. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:42, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello how are you?. If i moved my edit to the introduction of the paragraph of Protestant culture, still there is a problem for you?. I think this edit that you revort belong to Protestantism article. Have a nice day.--Jobas (talk) 14:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Protestantism and Protestantism by country are articles stricly about Protestantism. Additional informations concerning Catholics and atheists are irrevelant. Though, you can put it into the Protestant culture article as it needs expansion and a more detailed information won't hurt anyone.Ernio48 (talk) 14:19, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My edit was only about protestant Nobel Prize Laureates you can look agian: "According to 100 Years of Nobel Prize (2005), a review of Nobel prizes awarded between 1901 and 2000, 65.4% of Nobel Prize Laureates, have identified Christianity in its various forms as their religious preference (423 prizes).[138] While 32% have identified with Protestantism in it's various forms (208 prize).[138] although Protestant comprise 11.6%-13% of the world's population", the mention of Catholics and atheists was inside the reference not the article itself.--Jobas (talk) 14:30, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My bad. Nevertheless, I don't think it belongs to Protestantism by country as that article is about the demographic development of Protestantism. Nobel Award winners are certainly irrelevant there. I suppose you can place the Nobel Prizes thing only in the Protestant culture-related sections.Ernio48 (talk) 14:34, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. No problem but can you put it agian in the article of Protestantism in Protestant culture section. Becouse i don't want to edit since you revert it and my edit will sound as war editing. Thank you and have a nice day.--Jobas (talk) 14:38, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Berlin Cathedral, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prussian Union. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:01, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw that you deleted in the article related to the German empire the section about Bismarck. I do agree that there is no source, but there is a link directing to the chancellor that explains very well what was described in the former article. Would it be possible to keep this assertion that is all but the truth, and considering that the link directing to the article that develop this fact precisely could be admitted? The switch in the German policy after the withdraw of Bismark is essential to apprehend the early stages of isolation of the empire that will lead to the collapse?--Gabriel HM (talk) 04:50, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am well aware both sentences are very possibly true (with a possible exception of useless colonies - although I heard many historians mentioning this, it is still debatable as no one ever showed me the numbers or other data + can't imagine Tanzania being not a prosperous colony given that it has over 50 mln people today). I wasn't the one demanding citation. The citations stayed in the article for over a year and no one provided a citation. I would keep it, but there needs to be a reference instead the one who placed ^{[citation needed]} will come back and delete it over and over until citation is provided.Ernio48 (talk) 07:03, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited German Empire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prussian Union. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:09, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Religious affiliations of Chancellors of Germany, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christian Democratic Union. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:38, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity

Please stop deleting the examples of Anabaptists from the Christianity article. It's absolutely normal and OK to include a couple of examples of something without including the whole list. PepperBeast (talk) 21:07, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Curious as to why you are so against this edit. Jews have undeniably had a formidable influence on Germany…the word is mentioned in the article 14 times (and "Protestant" only 12, by the way).

viz.
List of German Muslims
List of German Bahá'í
List of German Jews

It has nothing to do with numbers, and everything to do with influence. This is not just "any minority". Jews are woven into the very fabric of German history. The article French people lists "Judaism" as a religion of the French people. I do not see why German people cannot be the same.

Edit: I would accept a 'minority' section. But we absolutely cannot have a Jew (Einstein) as one of the pictures and then not include him in what makes a "German"
--(Moshe) מֹשֶׁה‎ 05:15, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please tell me why you are so against this edit? --(Moshe) מֹשֶׁה‎ 04:36, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pure numbers, demographical reasons. If we are going to include Jewish let's include everyone else, cause-frankly-they are of the same significance today.Ernio48 (talk) 10:48, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. French people has this minority designation, as do many other nationality ethnic groups. If you're really so against including Jews here, then let us please remove the image of Einstein (who was Jewish), because it's silly to have him there otherwise. --(Moshe) מֹשֶׁה‎ 17:13, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	It looks like you're dealing with some stubborn types lately on certain articles, so I think you deserve this. Sιgε |д･) 01:07, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Southern Baptists" is not a religion. The religions practiced by the Clinton family include Southern Baptism and Methodism, which makes them Southern Baptists and Methodists. However, the tradition itself is known as Southern Baptism/Methodism, just as followers of Islam are known as Muslims, therefore the religion's name is Islam, not Muslims. MB298 (talk) 00:32, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I am leaving the current revision of the article until we can settle this dispute. MB298 (talk) 00:36, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, but keep in mind there is no common approval of the use of "Baptism", this term is largely reserved for the act of baptism, while the churches are called Baptist churches. Also, I don't think "Southern Baptism" is correct too, cause it's not a movement just one denomination - the Southern Baptist Convention, a part of the Baptist churches.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jonathan Edwards (theologian), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Religious revival. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:59, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Protestantism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Miller. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:55, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

perhaps. Acquaint yourself with it, and let me know what you think. Ciao. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 19:57, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

wot?Ernio48 (talk) 20:00, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your question, perhaps. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 16:28, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That wasn't a question but a sentence.Ernio48 (talk) 16:49, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So? _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 16:54, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Idk just sayinErnio48 (talk) 17:02, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! So wot you think of WP:NOTMEMORIAL? _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 17:07, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

its fine yeah cool bruhErnio48 (talk) 17:31, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Right: shedding light on THE DARKNESS OF GREED. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 18:22, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page David Bowie has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Thank you. Mlpearc (open channel) 23:31, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More specifically, do you even think when you write something on wikipedia, idiots? violates Wikipedia policies that we treat each other with due respect within a collaborative effort. Please see WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. 🖖ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 01:21, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know whatcha mean y'all, bruhs, but there ain't no other way.Ernio48 (talk) 12:39, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I feel your pain, only too well. Just be aware that this is policy, and repeat offenders lose editing privileges. 🖖ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 22:44, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Barack Obama. 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. Gamaliel (talk) 21:56, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Swedish Pentecostal Movement, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daniel Berg. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:58, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make unexplained changes to articles then repeat them with a youtube "source" only quoted in an edit summary and get stroppy with me. Unexplained unsourced changes can be reverted on sight. Britmax (talk) 17:38, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Presbyterianism page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Religion in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Unitarian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:45, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:22, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Germanic languages, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frisian language. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:15, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean a first or second language, or both? Tony (talk) 03:41, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Both. English is uncomparable. German does not even come close. See Germanic languages.Ernio48 (talk) 06:08, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John D. Rockefeller, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chevron. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:26, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don't insult trolls. It just excited and encourages them. Thank you. Jehochman ^Talk 12:51, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Waldensians page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:35, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Bahamas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Church of God. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:57, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly thank you for caring enough to make the edit.

The issues of the wars in the Cévennes are wide ranging and full of POVs- for a war that lasted two years- the bitterness that has survived is amazing.

The crux of the issue is that this is the lead sentence, and as such, that can be all a mobile phone user ever views. It is not obvious that Huguenots were the protestants we are talking about- or which type of Huguenots (and the Huguenot ) does not help - that still needs to be researched. We have conflict between versions on fr:wikipedia, en: and de. Not to mention occitan. For accessibility it is safer to keep the simple explanation.

At a later stage in the articles development I doubt that any of this will survive. Thanks for getting involved.--ClemRutter (talk) 13:32, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page French. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:42, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ernio48. You have new messages at Tobyc75's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Alizée

added a link pointing to French

Napoleon and Protestants

added a link pointing to Palatinate

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Huguenot. Compounding this is the removal of well-sourced material, to be replaced by the contradictory unsourced mess you added. You've had more than a few warnings about this already. Toddst1 (talk) 06:29, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Geneva has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Thank you. ZH8000 (talk) 11:54, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you purposefully and blatantly harass a fellow Wikipedian again, as you did at Geneva, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ZH8000 (talk) 11:56, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you reverted my edit on History of Calvinism. (To me your edit seemed unconstructive, as a whole, though there were very good copyedit bits in it.) In my opinion any article and its lead section should start with a description of the article topic. In this case, there could first be something general on Calvinism, not just the history of it. In average, people don't know what Calvinism is. I am not joking: for example in my country most people identify themselves as protestants and still they don't have a clue on what Calvinism is. Much the less in non-christian countries, I presume. The topic is of zero importance to me, and I have no knowledge on it, thus I will not write a lead section for the article. Maybe you could put up a sentence (or two) to create a good start for the article? Currently it starts abruptly and seems to miss a bit. The first sentence does not seem to be good English (I am not a native speaker of English but still). At least, please add a wikilink to the article on Calvinism and have the topic in bold somewhere in the early lead. Thank you.--Micraboy (talk) 06:06, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Radical Reformation into Protestant Reformation. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:51, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ernio ,please read LGBT rights in Bangladesh, the article is full of wrong information.আইশ্টে হায়লেশ (talk) 16:20, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why you refuse to accept consensus on articles such as Elvis Presley and continue to push your views on religion there and other places. You have been periodically pushing this edit for as long as I can remember. If you do it again, I will seek to have you topic banned from the page, or banned from editing religions into articles altogether. --Laser brain (talk) 04:13, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ernio48. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Iryna Harpy. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Religion in Latvia, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:11, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ernio48,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Napoleon and Protestants should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Napoleon and Protestants .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, CapitalSasha ~ talk 07:41, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I urge you to revisit this article, perhaps find time to make some improvements. Cheers.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:56, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your edits to Evangelicalism. It's always helpful to use an edit summary when making large or multiple edits. Cheers!

— Confession0791 ^talk 06:31, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Aruba page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ernio, pics are meant to be aligned to the right of the page - been this way for years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Images#Location

Semolato (talk) 13:33, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Walter Görlitz. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Mennonite, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. When you step over the line and go against consensus and claim Simmons was the founder, you're just spouting nonsense. He was one of the early leaders and influenced the ideas, but he did not found it. Seek consensus before any further changes. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:20, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pls stop edit warring, and remember the 3R rule. The point of saying Evangelical Christianity is to include denominations that do not consider themselves as Protestants, but base their faith on the Holy Bible. You want to exclude them and make Evangelism equal to Protestantism. --E-960 (talk) 13:13, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Read this article titled "Why Baptists are not Protestants" [1], and stop edit warring. --E-960 (talk) 13:18, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:E-960 see Talk:PolandErnio48 (talk) 15:30, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There's difference between decline and sufference as words.They derive both from latin.Decline can be good for scandinavian area or north Germany or north Netherlands,not for other countries.Suffer means that then you can recover (and in countries you wrote lutheranism is widely minority),decline is like more similar to not reverse.82.49.34.193 (talk) 18:41, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Come to the talk and don't revert Brittannica!79.49.192.139 (talk) 19:23, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply] 

Good correction in the article.79.49.192.139 (talk) 19:44, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Other good edit)79.49.192.139 (talk) 19:54, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't global consensus on the status quo of the article about the edit "Decline of the Catholic church".Reference is only about north Europe.Picuslor (talk) 10:52, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Jens Stoltenberg. Thank you. Bishonen | talk 22:43, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to see how any of the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man can have the Church of England as their state religion. The Church of England, by definition, is confined to England. Mjroots (talk) 19:37, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Look up State religion for details.Ernio48 (talk) 19:41, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I don't understand this edit. It appears to be improper. Thanks L3X1 (distænt write) 23:59, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

I am here this time to apologize to you, Ernio. I overlooked the circumstances of the edit and made some bad conclusions, sorry. L3X1 (distænt write) 02:15, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add flags to infoboxes without having a consensus to do so. Your edits are being rolled back. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:33, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you in some way related to the editor User:Emiya1980? I ask because both accounts have made similar editsL for instance adding flags to the info0boxes of German political and military subject articles. What, if any, is the relationship? Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:38, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No. I was trying to keep those articles consistent. How come Philipp Scheidemann, and several other Chancellors have flags and the rest does not?Ernio48 (talk) 19:43, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

They shouldn't have flags either.

You can answer my actual question more specifically at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ernio48. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:12, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gustav Bauer, Hermann Müller... There are more...Ernio48 (talk) 20:20, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ernio- A couple editing suggestions for you to consider:

• Please make a habit of providing an edit summary when you make a change to an article. Doing so makes it easier for your colleagues here to understand the intention of your edit.
• Plus, it will be easier for you and your co-editors to collaborate on articles if, instead of making multiple consecutive edits in rapid succession on an article, you use the "Show preview" button to view your changes incrementally before finally saving the page once you're satisfied with your edits. This keeps the page history of the article less cluttered. Thanks in advance for considering these suggestions. Eric ^talk 09:25, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Corny Ostermann, Ernio48!

Wikipedia editor Meatsgains just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Consider providing reliable sources to strengthen the page's verifiability.

To reply, leave a comment on Meatsgains's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Meatsgains (talk) 01:34, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Where is that rule? Frankly, I'd happily remove them from all Carolingian-era articles. There is no consensus for them. Pushy editors like yourself just add them willy-nilly, declaring matter-of-factly that, e.g., East Francia came to an end in 962, which is nonsense. Srnec (talk) 02:34, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Robby.is.on. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Dionne Warwick, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Robby.is.on (talk) 14:01, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add defamatory content, as you did at Matt K. Lewis. Robby.is.on (talk) 14:04, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well spotted! As you have seen, I've raised it on the article talk page, and I've also messaged the map creator to let him know. DuncanHill (talk) 14:39, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

I noticed your recent edit to Jan Hus does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Please use edit summaries for every edit to article space it makes it easier to understand the reasons and content. —DIYeditor (talk) 00:04, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]