User talk:AUC2012

August 2025

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to John Williams 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.
• If you need help, please see the Introduction to Wikipedia, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: John Williams was changed by AUC2012 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.871251 on 2025-08-13T13:35:49+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 13:35, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Richard Nixon, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Space in the infobox and lead section are precious—see WP:INFOBOXCLUTTER. Remsense 🌈 论 10:09, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Batman (film)

Please review the reasons for my reverts of your changes before reverting again. The budget applies to the whole production, not just filming, so it is more accurate to list it alongside the box office gross to better gauge the comparisons for financial success. There is no need to repeat "awards" in the lead for such a short sentence, which should summarize the contents of the article. The specific awards ceremony is linked in the "Accolades" section below, so the specific ceremony link is not really needed in the lead. As for the Dylan Clark redirect, there is nothing wrong with it being a redirect. Please review WP:NOTBROKEN, which says not to change such redirects just to "fix" them, because it could be a target that could be expanded in the future. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 14:54, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Naked Gun (2025 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alan Spencer. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 18:04, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Spiro Agnew, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Republican Party.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:52, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

October 2025

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. I don't know what you're doing because you won't use edit summaries but based on what I'm seeing it's nothing short of vandalism and possibly some POv pushing, and in highly contentious areas. Please stop. SPOOKYDICAE👻 19:08, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I not vandalized Wikipedia. It's real, I wanted to make some fix. AUC2012 (talk) 19:44, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Donald Trump

Please be advised that the contentious topics procedure applies to the article. Furthermore, the following rule applies when editing the article: You must follow the bold-revert-discuss cycle if your change is reverted. You may not reinstate your edit until you post a talk page message discussing your edit and have waited 24 hours from the time of this talk page message. You have violated this rule twice today with these two edits which have been reverted: 11:55 UTC and 12:58 UTC. You can find any applicable restrictions and other info on the Talk page of articles. Space4TCatHerder🖖 14:22, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Correcting my comment. The two violations involved two links. You added a link here, were reverted here, reinserted the link here, and were reverted again here. Same story with this link: added here, reverted here, reinserted here, and reverted a second time here. Space4TCatHerder🖖 15:37, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

---

Re: [1][2][3]

That's three times you have violated MOS:NOPIPE at the Donald Trump article. You were reverted each time with a link to NOPIPE. Are you having trouble reading edit summaries, trouble understanding the guideline, or trouble caring about the guideline? I can help you with some of that. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 15:42, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 2025

Hello, I'm TonySt. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Scott Cawthon, but you didn't provide a reliable source. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation, your edit is archived in the page history. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. tony 20:27, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 15:28, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't ignore the above notice. I see you still are neglecting to use edit summaries for big changes. For the sake of transparency, it's better to implement those when altering pages, even for small edits. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 17:50, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Space Jam: A New Legacy. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you. Please refrain from adding non-notable elements of the production to the lede. Per WP:FILMLEDE, we should only include "any writers or producers who are well known".

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 2025 - ii

Your recent editing history at Walt Disney shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing a page's content back to how you believe it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree with your changes. Please stop editing the page and use the talk page to work toward creating a version of the page that represents consensus among the editors involved. Wikipedia provides a page explaining how this is accomplished. If discussions reach an impasse, you can request help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution such as a third opinion. In some cases, you may wish to request page protection while a discussion to resolve the dispute is ongoing.

If you continue edit warring, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia—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, or whether it involves the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also, please 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— if things indicate that you intend to continue reverting content on the page. - SchroCat (talk) 21:27, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 2025

Hello, I'm Waxworker. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Eric Goldberg (animator), but you didn't provide a reliable source. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation, your edit is archived in the page history. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Waxworker (talk) 18:34, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]