Sample Page

Hello, Lulasaurius, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.

• Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
• Check out some of these pages:
  • Contributing to Wikipedia
  • Introduction to Wikipedia
  • How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
  • The five pillars of Wikipedia | Cheatsheet of WikiCode

• If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out the Teahouse, , or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! Rasnaboy (talk) 04:31, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

==References==
{{Reflist}}

Thanks for your contributions to Mixed Argentines. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the “Submit your draft for review!” button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Wikishovel (talk) 09:15, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I’m NebY. Your recent edit(s) to the page Demographics of the United Kingdom 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. NebY (talk) 11:13, 24 August 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:

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary), and then click the “Save” button. Thanks! Cordless Larry (talk) 07:30, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Mixed Ecuadorians. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the “Submit your draft for review!” button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:35, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Regarding your edit in Asian Argentines, never put a number (3,620,000) that conflicts with the cited source (3,500,000). Also, as you have already been told in a section above, please do write the intentions of your edits in edit summary. Accurate and meaningful edit summaries will help people to distinguish you from those other editors who are injecting false numbers in Argentina-related articles. Wotheina (talk) 04:04, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Ethnic groups of Argentina. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.

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:Mixed Argentines 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 or use Wikipedia’s real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:56, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is not the correct place to request new redirects. Please follow the instructions at Article wizard/Redirects. Thank you.

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:Mixed Argentines 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 or use Wikipedia’s real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:58, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lulasaurius! 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! Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:58, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited White Colombians, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page White Australian. 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) 07:54, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Afro-Argentines, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Angolan.

(Opt-out instructions.) —DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

 The comment the reviewer left was:

The history section does not have a single reference

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:Mixed Argentines 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 or use Wikipedia’s real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Cambalachero (talk) 19:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Italian Argentines, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Italian.

(Opt-out instructions.) —DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to inform you that I have reverted the recent additions of hybrid county flags for various ethnic groups on Wikipedia. If you believe that certain flags should be reinstated, please provide verifiable sources that demonstrate their official recognition or widespread usage.

Reason for reversions: The flags that you added are not official (or even commonly used) recognized symbols and lack any sourcing to the contrary.

Moving forward: I encourage you to review the relevant Wikipedia guidelines to ensure that future contributions adhere to our policies. Additionally, engaging in discussions on the article’s talk page can help reach a consensus with other editors. Also, as has been said several times by other editors, add an edit summary to summarize the changes you make to an article.

Petermgrund (talk) 16:39, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:55, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding state flags to articles about nations. We usually left them out because someone’s nationality and flag may not correlate. Thank you for your additions, but please stop doing that and revert them (or I will). Best regards, A09|(talk) 21:58, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lulasaurius. Thank you for your work on Moreno Argentines. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work. Is “Miscegenation” a good word to use in the lead? Apparently it’s a pejorative. Happy editing!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 20:12, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cuarteto, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Córdoba Province.

(Opt-out instructions.) —DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 9 January 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 Bolivia, 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. This article talks about Bolivians, not all Latin Americans. Thank you. Mamani1990 (talk) 13:28, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

please add edit summaries to your edits. it is hard to tell why you are replacing random images in the Rosario article. Ramdom-kid-editor (talk) 14:32, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the article! It seems to be mostly translated from Spanish Wikipedia. If so, WP:COPYWITHIN requires an attribution in the edit comment (I’ve made one for you). Викидим (talk) 06:33, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for contributing to the article Boliguayans. However, one of Wikipedia’s core policies is that material must be verifiable and attributed to reliable sources. You have recently used citations which copied, or mirrored, material from Wikipedia. This leads to a circular reference and is not acceptable. Most mirrors are clearly labeled as such, but some are in violation of our license and do not provide the correct attribution. Please help by adding alternate sources to the article you edited! If you need any help or clarification, you can look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia or ask at Wikipedia:New contributors’ help page, or just ask me. Thank you. Sam Kuru (talk) 12:05, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lulasaurius. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, “Mixed Ecuadorians“.

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 21:24, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Architecture of Argentina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cathedral of Córdoba.

(Opt-out instructions.) —DPL bot (talk) 07:57, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I’m Imcdc. I just wanted to let you know that your recent edit(s) to the page Religion in China have been reverted because they appear to have added incorrect information. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite a reliable source, discuss it on the article’s talk page, or leave me a message on my talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. Imcdc Contact 08:04, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Religion in China. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article’s talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia’s dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia’s Administrators’ noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Imcdc Contact 11:25, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Afrikaners, you may be blocked from editing. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:12, 15 May 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! Moxy🍁 01:26, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lulasaurius, many of your recent edits have assigned color codes to racial categories, trying to map these loose categories to specific skin colors. There a number of problems with this, including the lack of sourcing, the impossibility of assigning a skin color to each category, and the way you’ve made charts harder to interpret. Can you please self-revert these changes? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:09, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lulasaurius, I see that you haven’t heeded Firefangledfeathers‘ warning from last month. I don’t have time to examine and revert all your recent edits with this issue, but this one was particularly unencyclopedic: [1]. Please stop doing this. It is against numerous policies, probably most importantly WP:NOR. But also empirically, it’s quite obvious that each “race” encompasses a wide variety of skin tones. Thanks, Generalrelative (talk) 06:21, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Generalrelative, I chose these colors to create racial group charts using statistics from each country’s official national censuses. I know very well that the concept of race goes beyond color, but although outdated, it’s still common in people’s minds for quick understanding, like the colors in religion. A good example is Brazil, which literally names races by color in its censuses (brancos, pardos, pretos, amarelos and indígenas).

Although the colors I used may seem unconventional, I find them less stereotypical than using only pure yellow, black, or red, as others do. I tried to use colors that represented the average complexion of each human group, making them realistic and distinctive without falling into absurdity. Lulasaurius (talk) 23:08, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. The crucial issue here is “No Original Research”, which is one of our core policies. You’re violating it. I know that it’s coming from a good-faith desire to be helpful, but if you continue you will likely be blocked from editing. Let me know if you have specific questions about the policy. Generalrelative (talk) 23:57, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, I think it’s okay to delete the table I made in “Color terminology for race.” In the case of the graphics, I don’t think it’s necessary since there isn’t any research as such, since I simply chose a color that easily represents what I want to show. For example, for “Others” I used light gray, or for “Undeclared” I used white. It’s more of an aesthetic decision, like using dark purple for Catholicism, light purple for Protestantism, and white for Atheism. Lulasaurius (talk) 01:06, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, that is more acceptable. At that point it becomes a judgement call, which is why I didn’t revert these. Take care, Generalrelative (talk) 01:16, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, have a good week. 👍 Lulasaurius (talk) 01:27, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lulasaurius, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I’ve started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Boliguayans, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boliguayans.

Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it’s not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|JohnMizuki}}. And don’t forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

JohnMizuki (talk) 20:54, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Christian genocide in Nigeria has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Note that the article doesn’t cite any relevant high-quality sources (UN report, Amnesty International, Genocide study) for such an extraordinary claim WP:EXTRAORDINARY (of Genocide). We already have an article, Religious violence in Nigeria , which is wholly dedicated to violence against Christians in Nigeria and covers all of these topics. That article thoroughly covers everything mentioned here. Most of the sources cited in this article do not support the “genocide” assertion. Furthermore, the article claims that 53,000–100,000 Christians have died in the ongoing genocide. The Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED) reported that, as of 2025, just under 53,000 civilians, including Christians and Muslims, had been killed in targeted political violence since 2009.^[1]. ACLED data on religious violence in Nigeria are frequently cited by major news organizations, including the BBC, Al Jazeera, Reuters, CNN, NBC, and the Associated Press reporting on religious violence in Nigeria. ^{[2][3][4][5][6][7][8]} In my opinion, this article should be deleted because it makes an extraordinary claim without citing high-quality sources WP:EXTRAORDINARY. Although Donald Trump claims that there is an ongoing Christian genocide in Nigeria, many relevant sources say otherwise. Al Jazeera reported that claims of a targeted “Christian genocide” in Nigeria have been disputed by humanitarian analysts and crisis-monitoring organizations. Experts argue that while armed groups like Boko Haram have committed deadly attacks, the violence is more complex and does not exclusively target Christians. Analysts attribute the ongoing violence to a variety of overlapping factors beyond religion ^[9] According to a report by the Associated Press, analysts have said that Nigeria’s ongoing security crisis does not meet the legal definition of genocide under the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which defines genocide as acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. Olajumoke Ayandele, an assistant professor at New York University’s Center for Global Affairs who specializes in conflict studies, told the AP that the violence in Nigeria represents widespread killings rather than targeted attacks against a specific group, warning that describing the situation as genocide could further heighten tensions.^[10] Deutsche Welle reported that narratives such as the so-called “Christian genocide” claim can obscure the complex, overlapping drivers of violence in the country and may weaken interfaith and community-level peacebuilding initiatives. The report cited Samuel Malik, a senior researcher at the pan-African think tank Good Governance Africa, who said that “there is no credible evidence of a state-led or coordinated campaign to exterminate Christians, which is what genocide is.”^[11] These reports regarding genocide, along with Donald Trump’s claim, are discussed in the ‘Reaction’ section of the article ‘Religious violence in Nigeria.’

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. Hu741f4 (talk) 23:44, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Christian genocide in Nigeria is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian genocide in Nigeria until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Hu741f4 (talk) 21:06, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:51, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the article that you created is set to be deleted. I read through it and the material looks like it can used at the article on Religious violence in Nigeria. Why not add it there? desmay (talk) 01:17, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Many of the materials are just misrepresenting the sources. Hu741f4 (talk) 03:23, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Ashkenazi Jews. Doug Weller talk 09:04, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do not add information to the Ashkenazi Jews page; add images related to the topic of Jewish immigration to the Americas, the Yiddish language, and notable Ashkenazi Jews. In the case of the information on the statistics of Muslims (Great Replacement conspiracy theory) I used a source that has been circulating for years from the Pew Research Center on other wiki pages, so I didn’t add anything new. Lulasaurius (talk) 03:48, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia’s neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Great Replacement conspiracy theory. Doug Weller talk 09:06, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you translated text from es:Inmigración senegalesa en Argentina to Senegalese Argentines. While you are welcome to translate Wikipedia content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia’s licensing requires that you provide attribution to the contributor(s) of the original article. When translating from a foreign-language Wikipedia article, this is supplied at a minimum in an edit summary on the page where you add translated content, identifying it as a translation and linking it to the source page. Sample wording for this is given here. If you forgot, or were not aware of this requirement, attribution must be given retroactively, for example:

NOTE: Content in the edit of 01:25, January 25, 2023 was translated from the existing French Wikipedia article at [[:fr:Exact name of French article]]; see its history for attribution.

Retroactive attribution may be added using a dummy edit; see Repairing insufficient attribution. It is good practice, especially if translation is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{translated page}} template on the talk page of the destination article. If you have added translated content previously which was not attributed at the time it was added, you must add attribution retrospectively, even if it was a long time ago. You can read more about author attribution and the reasons for it at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. JTtheOG (talk) 16:52, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited White Canadians, a link pointing to the disambiguation page White Australian was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) —DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Good afternoon, Lulasaurius. I am sending you this message for you seem to be the main editor/contributor of the aforementioned article. Let me tell you that about 14 years ago, I found an article with the same title, and I began to expand it greatly. But then many editors appeared and began to state that it was “original research”, that it was “Racist”, and so on. The debate grew so big, that eventually the article was set aside for deletion. No matter how hard I tried to stop it; it was finally deleted more than a decade ago. I was also blocked indefinitely, and I was unblocked less than a year ago. In the meantime, a fine colleague Argentine editor modified and reinstated the article as “Argentineans of European descent” some years ago. But that struggle and those constant arguements with other editors and administrators wore me down in such a way, that I barely edit WP articles since then. At that time previous to deletion, I didn’t want to lose all the hard work I had put on the original article, so I saved it in other wikiplaces. Here, I give you the web page where I saved my work; it is half in Spanish and English, for I didn’t finish it. Most probably, you will find useful sources and sections you may use to expand the current article. I hope some part of my work helps giving “White Argentines” the encyclopedia level it deserves. This is the link: https://argentinidad.fandom.com/wiki/Blanco_Argentino Feel free to contact me if you think I may contribute in any other way. Pablo Martin Zampini (talk) 18:54, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to Religion in Georgia (country) and Religion in Iceland] and all the rest the colors have to be easily distinguishable from each other. Most of these weren’t great to begin with but your choices made them worst. Erp (talk) 04:17, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I had some problems with the Protestant variants because, with so many, it’s difficult to find many shades similar to the standard. But for the larger denominations, I do use clearly distinguishable variants of violet (Catholicism #7D007D, Protestantism #BA55D3, Eastern Orthodoxy #9065CA, Eastern Orthodoxy #AF74FF, Restorationism #E0B0FF, and Other Christians #B695C0). Lulasaurius (talk) 22:22, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Correction, I meant Oriental Orthodoxy #AF74FF. Lulasaurius (talk) 22:30, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]