Hello, Aonadh nan Gaidheal, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Draft:Deeside Gaelic, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

• Article development
• Standard layout
• Lead section
• The perfect article
• Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! DanCherek (talk) 03:48, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The page Draft:Deeside Gaelic has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appeared to be a direct copy from https://doug5181.wixsite.com/aberdeenshire-gaelic/home and https://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2021-03/Gaelic%20on%20the%20North%20East%20Coast%20UoA%20Nov%202020.pdf. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition has been be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review. DanCherek (talk) 03:48, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I mean i used a paraphrasing tool on all of it, i feel this was dishonest of wikipedia to make the claim i completely copied it considering it wasnt even the majority of the page, i'm sorry but you are wrong here. not me. Aonadh nan Gaidheal (talk) 09:46, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Using a paraphrasing tool on copyright text creates a derivative work in which the original copyright still applies. It’s not okay to just rearrange some words and replace some with their synonyms, regardless of whether you use a tool to do it. Such superficial modification of text is close paraphrasing. Instead, please summarize information entirely in your own words – you may find it helpful to read a source, then imagine how you would summarize it in your own words to a friend without looking at it. DanCherek (talk) 13:47, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

what if the original wording is exactly how i would word it to a friend?. Aonadh nan Gaidheal (talk) 20:19, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Isle of Arran have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Isle of Arran was changed by Aonadh nan Gaidheal (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.886893 on 2023-02-17T14:03:19+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 14:03, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm StephenMacky1. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, List of active separatist movements in Europe, 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. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. StephenMacky1 (talk) 11:58, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_for_the_Full_Emancipation_of_the_Roma_of_Macedonia its literally on this page where i got this information from. Aonadh nan Gaidheal (talk) 12:17, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Even the source that you cited uses the term "reportedly" for the alleged separatist movement, which means that it's not something undisputed. We follow what sources write. Since the source questions that there was such a separatist movement, there's no good reason to include it in a list of separatist movements. Only those movements which are sourced and proven to be active and/or that they exist should be included. I do not know of such current movements, especially in North Macedonia. StephenMacky1 (talk) 12:45, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Romani_people#Romani_nationalism theres also this, that there is a romani nationalism movement. Aonadh nan Gaidheal (talk) 13:19, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There might be, however no proven Romani separatist movement in North Macedonia. StephenMacky1 (talk) 13:29, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Arran Gaelic requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.artwarefineart.com/gallery/isle-arran-largs-ayrshire-scotland-1868. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:19, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The page isn't its a copy of Isle of Arran#Gaelic as I intended to move over that part of the page to have its own page. but wikipedia didn't allow me. please read the notes made instead of making baseless accusations, thanks. Aonadh nan Gaidheal (talk) 15:36, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aonadh nan Gaidheal. I reviewed the request to delete this page and I can provide some more information. The notice wasn't suggesting there was a problem with you copying from one Wikipedia article to another, but that the content you added (copied) was itself copied from an external website. That would be a copyright violation in most cases, which for legal reasons requires that the offending content be removed. I had a better look, though, and found that the external website seems to have copied that content from Wikipedia, not the other way around - I wrote more about this at Talk:Arran Gaelic if you're interested.

You are allowed to copy from one Wikipedia article to another, however our site's content license requires giving credit to the original contributors. It is usually sufficient to leave a link in your edit summary to the permanent link of the source page (you can say "content copied from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=1138385507" for example). Since you didn't, I added a template ({{copied}}) to the article's talk page to show where the content originated. You can read more information on copying within Wikipedia at this link.

I hope that helps, and thank you for your contributions. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:05, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also reverted the bot that undid your edit to Isle of Arran. I think it did that because section blanking is a common form of vandalism, and you didn't leave an edit summary, and that must have tripped one of its filters. Sorry about that, it shouldn't have happened. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:08, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pirate Republics has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you.

In addition, your choice of articles to add to the category weren't always clear. For example, the article New Atlantis (micronation) says nothing about pirates, so how was it appropriate to add the article to a "pirate republics" category? Largoplazo (talk) 16:50, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of active separatist movements in Europe. 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:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. 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.

When you find that your suggested edit is reverted by one or more editors, one practical way is to follow the BRD cyclus, see WP:BRD. If your Bold edit has been Reverted, your next step should not be to reinstate your edit, but to start a Discussion in the talk page of the article.

On another note, I will ask you to avoid personal attacks, see WP:NPA. In your edit summary here, you refer to my talk page with the comment this seems to be a propaganda account with complaints on their talk page about promoting war propaganda. The only mention of war propaganda on that page is made by a user who was at that time inbetween two blocks for personal attacks and has later been indefinitely blocked. Uncritically repeating that completely unfounded accusation is paramount to making a personal attack yourself. Making a personal attack in an edit summary is especially serious, since it cannot be changed or retracted. In general, personal remarks should be avoided in edit summaries, see WP:SUMMARYNO. T*U (talk) 14:28, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm Landroving Linguist. Your recent edit(s) to the page Semitic languages appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been reverted for now. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. 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. LandLing 19:51, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

it was unclassified and needed somewhere to be placed, on its own page it doesn't list it as anything else but semitic. Aonadh nan Gaidheal (talk) 08:28, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:PARENTCAT. I had to revert your addition of Category:Ancient languages in most of the articles you introduced it, since they already had more precise subcategories. Consider the aforementioned guideline before adding any new categories in the future. Thank you. Demetrios1993 (talk) 02:37, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In your edits, you say that the "edit was sourced, it was discussed in chat, one of these sources has him saying that labour is conservative. and centrist."

Can you point me to where this consensus was found. Unless I'm mistaken, it's looked like you've unilaterally decided that Labour is a conservative party without gaining this consensus in the talk page first. Michaeldble (talk) 20:23, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been warned in the past for unconstructive editing, I've sourced it, the evidence keeps piling up for this, labour becoming centrist, this is from both left-wing, impartial, and right wing sources.

you also fundamentally misunderstand progressive conservatism

it is an ideology that is syncretic.

Unilaterally? this is wikipedia, people are free to edit. Aonadh nan Gaidheal (talk) 20:32, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I reverted was that it does say within the infobox for the ideology part: "Please discuss on talk page before changing." This means that you should look to gain a consensus within the talk page before changing it. As for "I've sourced it", initially I can't see any of those sources explicitly using the term "progressive conservatism" unless I've missed it. Michaeldble (talk) 20:43, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

you have missed it. its literally in one of the sources Aonadh nan Gaidheal (talk) 21:13, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which one said that explicitly? When I pressed Ctrl + F, I couldn't find the term Progressive Conservatism once, can you point me to which page specifically. If it's only one source as you say, does that mean you've added three sources that don't support your addition? Michaeldble (talk) 21:21, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

first of all your tone is not appreciated please desist from condescending language you are here in bad faith.

its not explicitly stated but if you are unable to read between lines then thats your own problem.

see why you shouldn't condescend people?

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/labour-real-conservatives-keir-starmer-protect-way-life-2337576 Aonadh nan Gaidheal (talk) 21:58, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

and also when it comes to third way, that is rooted in blairism, a centrist ideology that attempts to reconcile right-wing and left-wing politics by advocating a varying synthesis of centre-right economic policies with centre-left social policies, you would know that if you had any knowledge on the subject which you claim. Aonadh nan Gaidheal (talk) 22:02, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The additions should not need readers to read between the lines, they should say it explicitly. I am certainly not here in bad faith - I'm concerned that the sources didn't back up what you were saying. The main reason I reverted regardless was less about the content and more that you should've looked to gain a consensus first as it said in the infobox. I didn't actually mention anything about the Third Way, just the Progressive Conservatism. This link you just provided also didn't mention the term Progressive Conservatism. Pretty hilarious too that you complain about me being condescending and then finish your message with "you would know that if you had any knowledge on the subject which you claim" Michaeldble (talk) 22:23, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

it was to show you what you were doing when you were talking to me... when you condescended me... you condescenders just don't like the mirror held up to yourself. Aonadh nan Gaidheal (talk) 22:29, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Regardless, please make sure that your sources explicitly back up what you're saying in future Michaeldble (talk) 22:35, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Antrim Irish has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This page is not of general interest outside of Irish dialectology. There is no seperate page for Mayo/Waterford Irish etc, and those dialects still have native speakers. Additionally it does not give much information that is not available on the page for Ulster Irish.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at List of historical unrecognized states and dependencies, 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. DrKay (talk) 20:50, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Hellenic languages. 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:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. 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. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:37, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They were clearly making edits which were to push the narrative that Tsakonian is greek, they had no understanding of linguistics, please consider my side before you jump to their side, thanks. Aonadh nan Gaidheal (talk) 16:39, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For evading your original block from User:Judeobasquelanguage, you have been blocked from editing Wikipedia.

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Canterbury Tail talk 12:39, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]