User talk:Consist4q

This is Consist4q's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Midland Railway 2601 Class (January 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by LittlePuppers was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Midland Railway 2601 Class and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

LittlePuppers (talk) 08:59, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Consist4q! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! LittlePuppers (talk) 08:59, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

Hello, I'm Schrödinger's jellyfish. I noticed that you recently removed content from Caledonian Railway 812 and 652 Classes without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. 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. Thanks. Schrödinger's jellyfish ✉ 05:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

it was a mistake Consist4q (talk) 04:11, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making such edits, such as at SER A class. You also made such edits twice more, but it was removing unsourced info, so absolutely no issue there - but without an edit summary explaining the removal, it’s hard to understand why the removal was done. Danners430 (talk) 09:16, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that one or more recent edit(s) you made did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit 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 (Briefly describe your changes)

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! Danners430 (talk) 09:03, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You've just made a huge raft of edits to images, and not one single edit summary. Why are you still not including them? Danners430 _{tweaks made} 07:29, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adding images to infoboxes

Hi, will you please not do this. The image is far too big, and in an infobox there is almost never a good reason to use full image syntax. You should simply add the image filename (minus the File: part) to the |image= parameter, as in |image=George Ivatt.png. Also, the blank line at the top is undesirable. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2025

Hi Consist4q! I noticed that you've made several edits in order to restore your preferred version of LMS Compound 4-4-0. The impulse to repeatedly undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure that you're aware of Wikipedia's edit warring policy. Repeatedly undoing the changes made by other users in a back-and-forth fashion like this is disallowed, even if you feel what you're doing is justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages in order to try to reach a consensus with the other editors involved. If you are unable to come to an agreement at Talk:LMS Compound 4-4-0, please use one of the dispute resolution options that are available in order to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of repeatedly reverting other editors' changes can help you avoid getting drawn into edit wars. Thank you. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 22:35, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Consist4q would you please stop edit warring over infobox images. Per the edit summary when I originally reverted your mass changes, in my opinion the previous image was better. The correct process now is to discuss this on the article talk page, not to start edit warring. Please discuss these changes. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 19:46, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]