User talk:Anonymouseditor366

Welcome Anonymouseditor366!

Now that you've joined Wikipedia, there are 50,866,957 registered editors!

Hello, Anonymouseditor366. Welcome to Wikipedia!

I'm FULBERT, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.

To help get you started, you may find these useful:

The Five Pillars (fundamental principles) of Wikipedia

Introduction to Wikipedia (and Editing)

Writing a New Article

Teahouse: Ask a Question

When editing, follow the 3 Core Content Policies:

1. Neutral point of view: represent significant views fairly

2. Verifiability: claims should cite reliable, published sources

3. No original research: no originality; reference published sources

Always cite Independent and Reliable sources for all claims you make when editing.

Remember to always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes ~~~~ at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to this (your talk) page, and a timestamp.

Sincerely, FULBERT (talk) 06:45, 24 December 2025 (UTC) (Leave me a message)[reply]

Thank you! I appreciate the tips and I will make sure to implement them whenever I edit anything AnonymousEditor366 (talk) 14:32, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Username change

I just happened to be looking through recent edits and saw you wanted to change your username. I've never been through the process myself but you can go to Wikipedia:Changing username to read the needed instructions and Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple to make a request. TornadoLGS (talk) 03:41, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think I have to wait thirty days cause I just made it for the first time. Thanks for the tips though! AnonymousEditor366 (talk) 04:43, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seems obvious that you cannot edit articles that are contrary to your faith in a way that conforms to our policies and guidelines

So if you want to remain unblocked you will have to avoid them. Doug Weller talk 10:46, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I will hold a NPOV when editing in the future. I did not realize how to edit rightly before but am now aware that it needs to have a NPOV. AnonymousEditor366 (talk) 13:50, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AnonymousEditor366 edited Genesis creation narrative well after repeated warnings from you and other users Doug, violating consensus that is noted at the top of the page and marking the edit "minor". I reverted the edit, just fyi. Amranu (talk) 21:08, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get how this is a bad use of editing! It actually made the article more consistent throughout and I only changed one word! It said "myth" at the beginning of the article but referred to it as "account" throughout the rest of the article. Changing it to "account" only made the artice more consistent throughout and also helped promote a neutral point of view as wikipedia's policies state is necessary! AnonymousEditor366 (talk) 21:52, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It literally states in a comment at the top of the page when you go into editor in a comment "Please do not remove the phrase and link to "creation myth" from the first paragraph without discussing your proposal on the talk page first. There has been a consensus since November 2011 to include it in the lead." which is -exactly- what you did.

Far from being neutral, describing Genesis as an "account" presupposes the events described in it reflect actual events. Amranu (talk) 22:02, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, I did not see that comment. I will pay better attention in the future. AnonymousEditor366 (talk) 02:12, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I assume this comment exists based on what you've told me, but I can't find it myself. AnonymousEditor366 (talk) 02:15, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can review the original Request for Comment (RfC) for the current framing here if you wish. Because this current framing is a result of an RfC, any changes would probably similarly require an RfC to change consensus on the matter, although this is unlikely to happen given consensus on the matter has held for well over a decade.

Finally, I'd like to point out that you seem to be marking a lot of your edits as minor edits when they are not, so please review Minor edits to understand when and when not to use that flag. It's better to err on the side of not using it if you aren't sure.

To find the comment, click on the "edit" button for the Genesis creation narrative page. You'll find it on the line below "Creationism sidebar" early in the page in the edit box. Amranu (talk) 02:18, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I see. Sorry about that, I should have paid better attention. I will review the minor edits thing AnonymousEditor366 (talk) 04:18, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I see that the minor edit thing is actually different then I thought, I will make sure to only mark actual edits as minor edits. Sorry about this incident AnonymousEditor366 (talk) 04:21, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]