Editing by unregistered users from your shared IP address or address range may be currently disabled due to abuse. However, you are still able to edit if you sign in with an account. If you are currently blocked from creating an account, and cannot create one elsewhere in the foreseeable future, you may follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Request an account to request that volunteers create your username for you. Please use an email address issued to you by your ISP, school or organization so that we may verify that you are a legitimate user on this network. Please reference this block in the comment section of the form.
Please check on this list that the username you choose has not already been taken. We apologize for any inconvenience.
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of
your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to
British royal family, did not appear constructive and has 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 the
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. Sarah, Duchess of York, is listed later in the allocated section. As she is divorced, it would be incorrect to list her as the Queen’s daughter in law. Thank you for your contributions and understanding. Have a wonderful week!
Bettydaisies (
talk)
20:29, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to
British Army, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits have been
reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the
sandbox. Thank you.
BilCat (
talk)
22:20, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at
English people, you may be
blocked from editing.
Mutt Lunker (
talk)
01:42, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at
Seven Years' War. Your edits appear to constitute
vandalism and have been
reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the
loss of editing privileges. Thank you.
MerelyPumpkin (
talk)
17:04, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at
Seven Years' War, you may be
blocked from editing.
MerelyPumpkin (
talk)
17:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at
Seven Years' War.
Peaceray (
talk)
17:40, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello there. No city founded after 1 AD should be added to that list. Yes, London is ancient, but it is not ancient enough for a list where you can find cities found around 1000 BCE and earlier. So, please do not add it again. -- Edelseider ( talk) 09:16, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
The Banner. I wanted to let you know that one or more of
your recent contributions to
Celtic Britons have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the
Teahouse. Thanks.
The Banner
talk
20:49, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at
Germanic peoples. Your edits appear to be
disruptive and have been or will be
reverted.
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. The Banner talk 21:10, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at
Germanic peoples. Your edits appear to be
disruptive and have been or will be
reverted.
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. {{u| SamStrongTalks}} ( Talk) 21:10, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at
Gauls, you may be
blocked from editing.
The Banner
talk
21:11, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add
unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at
Thirteen Colonies.
BilCat (
talk)
17:27, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make disruptive edits to Wikipedia contrary to the
Manual of Style, as you did at
Kingdom of England.
CodeTalker (
talk)
21:21, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Coronations in Europe. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Eric talk 01:06, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at
Francis North, 1st Earl of Guilford, you may be
blocked from editing.
The Banner
talk
17:33, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you
disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at
Coronations in Europe.
Eric
talk
03:31, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
SunDawn. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of
your recent contributions—specifically
this edit to
Leader of the Opposition (Israel)—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the
Help desk. Thanks.
SunDawn (
talk)
01:31, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, and
welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly
reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at
Sydney. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "
edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the
normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a
consensus on the
talk page.
If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges on that page. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. General Ization Talk 17:44, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Coronations in Europe shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—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, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also 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—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. General Ization Talk 17:47, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Kingdom of England shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—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, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also 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—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. General Ization Talk 17:48, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you
vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at
Coronations in Europe, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
Eric
talk
18:13, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on
edit warring. The thread is
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:98.114.254.117 reported by User:General Ization (Result: ). Thank you.
General Ization
Talk
17:58, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Bbb23 (
talk)
18:25, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of
your recent contributions—specifically
this edit to
Ron Swanson—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the
Help desk. Thanks.
Materialscientist (
talk)
14:17, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This is the
discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's
IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may
create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users.
Registering also hides your IP address. |