Hello! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. You are welcome to edit anonymously; however, creating an account is free and has several benefits (for example, the ability to create pages, upload media and edit without one's IP address being visible to the public).

Create an account

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! XenonNSMB (talk, contribs) 19:01, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Francesco De Gregori, 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. Binksternet (talk) 19:19, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I remain of my opinion: the image of Shakespeare is better as far as Italophilia is concerned. Possibly propose your modification of the article talk, so we could read other opinions. --LukeWiller (talk) 13:32, 16 September 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, inserting both images is a good compromise. --LukeWiller (talk) 13:50, 16 September 2022 (UTC).[reply]

You should read WP:MOS, "controversy" sections should not be used in an article. And if you think that you know better, I recommend you to actually make an account. In this edit, you've removed post-2014 info from the lede. You should put this back. Vacant0 (talk) 20:38, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've reinstated some of the content back. If you're dissatisfied use this talk page and not mine. Thanks. Vacant0 (talk) 21:00, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:37, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]