Talk:Numberjacks

message: The edits that you made were so badly done, it was hard to believe that they were valid. So I had to revert them. Yusheng02 (talk) 23:35, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: As has already been explained on your talk page, you need to explain your actions and why you think all of the edits are vandalism (they are not) as well as what version you are reverting to on the article's talk page. Simply disagreeing with the edits is not justification for calling them vandalism and reverting multiple edits, especially when, also as explained on your talk page, many of the edits are quite valid. Since your inappropriate reversions have been opposed, three times now, you need consensus for these changes. Persistently reverting without valid justification, with examples, is edit-warring and will likely result in you being blocked, especially since you are now refusing to explain yourself, as indicated by this edit summary. --AussieLegend (✉) 23:42, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: This page looks so bad, it looks more like vandalism than "valid" edits! It looks so informal, compared to the previous version! I mean, look at all those uncapitalised "numberjacks"! And there is absolutely no evidence that Numberjacks was aired on TV Asahi! Yusheng02 (talk) 02:40, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: You reverted all of the changes on the page as vandalism and that was simply not appropriate as there are many valid edits, for example these. It's impossible to work out what you think is vandalism because you still haven't explained that. A quick look through the page history shows several bad edits as well as reversions of those bad edits. Prior to your most recent reversions, you last edited on 27 July 2019 but that is not the version that you've been reverting to, so your reversions do not look productive, which is why I have asked you several times to explain what revision you are reverting to. That you have removed a valid maintenance template that has been in the article since September 2018, as well as several other valid templates, makes it look like you have reverted at least that far. There are certainly some issues with edits made by , who has been blocked as a sockpuppet, but that doesn't justify reverting everything. I'm happy to work with you to make fixes to the article but I can't do that if I don't know what your specific objections are. You need to make several smaller changes, explaining them with appropriate edit summaries and not just make one big revert. --AussieLegend (✉) 08:46, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Make several smaller changes? But won't editing several times be considered repetitive by the other users? You know, as in spamming? Yusheng02 (talk) 15:55, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The changes don't have to be miniscule. Make changes and explain them all in the edit summary. Then make the next change and explain that. Make as many changes as you need to. If you do that and somebody then makes a bad edit (vandalism etc), it's a help if there's an edit summary already explaining whay it's wrong. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:34, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Invalid edits reverted 

message: The first link (to the Numberjacks store) is out of date. JonathanEdits (talk) 22:13, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 

message: 2A02:C7F:1E94:D100:B06F:151C:B2E3:A936 (talk) 15:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:16, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The numberjackCharacters 

message: There is a meme called "Beanos". It features the character "One" from these series and a remixed Spongebob song. So there should be a new section called "Internet popularity" where it is told about the meme that first was published on May 2019 featuring the character from the series, "One" standing in front of a wall (from the episode "One More Time"). I hope that section will be added and i can't edit it myself because it is semi-protected.
:cool. im gonna do that. Lionsleeps23 (talk) 18:22, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Memes references (Popularity) 

message: 27.109.115.133 (talk) 13:14, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 25 June 2021 

message: Ahextra2010 (talk) 19:51, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone may add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:12, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 14 March 2022