User talk:Victoriaelizabeth9275

Welcome!

Hi Victoriaelizabeth9275! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing!

Hi Victoriaelizabeth9275! I noticed that you recently made an edit and marked it as "minor", but it may not have been. On Wikipedia, "minor edit" refers only to superficial edits that could never be disputed, such as fixing typos or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not minor, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. Jay8g [V•T•E] 21:38, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have been adding sources, but now they’re gone. I didn’t know someone else was also editing…. Victoriaelizabeth9275 (talk) 19:24, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

stop edit - Wormsloe Historic Site

Wormsloe Historic Site stop edit Gvihar📝 19:19, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Victoriaelizabeth9275, please add content only with reliable, published sources; do not make changes without them. Read and follow Verifiability and policies.Gvihar📝 19:20, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Gvihar📝 19:20, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, not in an edit war…. No one else is editing, just me. I’ve been doing it in sections because I’m at work rn. Please unblock me. I worked at this site for over a year and it’s all sourced materials….. I’m so confused what I did wrong. Victoriaelizabeth9275 (talk) 19:28, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that you go to the article’s talk page, click on “Add topic,” and start an open discussion with sources. If the information is correct and properly sourced, it will be added. Gvihar📝 19:38, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making repeated edits? Gvihar📝 19:39, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did stop. Victoriaelizabeth9275 (talk) 19:41, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also being accused of editing warring is incorrect. Literally it was just me editing, I wasn’t battling anyone. Victoriaelizabeth9275 (talk) 19:42, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not talking about a conflict what I mean is that repeatedly editing the article again and again goes against Wikipedia's policies. Gvihar📝 19:45, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Victoriaelizabeth9275, please add content only with reliable, published sources; do not make changes without them. Read and follow Verifiability and policies.Gvihar📝 19:45, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did! They had sources! You just deleted them all Victoriaelizabeth9275 (talk) 19:50, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is so dumb. I’m just trying to correct the info and providing sources and you just deleted it. And tell me to doo it all over again in the forums. Why do it twice!? I already did it once, not doing it again. Victoriaelizabeth9275 (talk) 19:51, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that you go to the article’s talk page, click on “Add topic,” and start an open discussion with sources. If the information is correct and properly sourced, it will be added. Gvihar📝 19:54, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there an echo in here? I wasted like 8 hours trying to make sure my grammar was nice and it’s just gone for no reason Victoriaelizabeth9275 (talk) 19:56, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At several places, you made changes without adding sources. Please do not modify the article based on personal opinion. Gvihar📝 19:57, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn’t, but now I probably won’t do anything again bc this has been extremely rude. Victoriaelizabeth9275 (talk) 20:00, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wormsloe_Historic_Site&diff=prev&oldid=1304065749 Gvihar📝 19:59, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brooks, Robert Preston. “Wormsloe House and Its Masters.” The Georgia Historical Quarterly 40, no. 2 (1956): 144–51. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40577670. Victoriaelizabeth9275 (talk) 20:01, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please avoid making repeated edits. The article has been edited in a way that creates confusion—sometimes content is added, then removed—it’s hard to follow. Kindly research the topic thoroughly, add the correct content once, and discuss it on the article’s talk page. It will be updated accordingly. Gvihar📝 20:05, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you’ve been so helpful, I really feel like I understood it once you repeated yourself for the 4th time. Victoriaelizabeth9275 (talk) 20:08, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that you first write the article content properly, and then add it to the article’s talk page. This is a better option it will save your time, avoid confusion, and make it easier for others to understand. Gvihar📝 20:08, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Victoriaelizabeth9275, you can safely ignore everything Gvihar had written above: see this discussion [1] at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents where it has been made absolutely clear that Gvihar, who has very little experience and quite obviously doesn't understand Wikipedia policies, should not be handing out advice. From a quick look, I can see nothing wrong with your edits to the Wormsloe Historic Site article. I think that all your earlier edits have been restored, and you should feel free to carry on. AndyTheGrump (talk) 10:10, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Hi Victoria, it looks like you're doing everything fine, please disregard that other editor. I'll have a talk withthem. -- asilvering (talk) 23:38, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]