82.3.149.129

Content dispute at Timeline of BBC One

The other editor involved in the edit war at Timeline of BBC One has requested discussion on the article talk page. Discussion is the manner in which disputes are settled here at Wikipedia. Please engage in discussion and immediately cease edit warring. If discussion does not resolve the matter, then utilize dispute resolution. But stop the edit war. Now. Either engage in discussion or drop the stick and walk away from the dispute. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 20:56, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

December 2020

Hello, I'm Nieuwsgierige Gebruiker. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Talk:Timeline of BBC One 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. Nieuwsgierige Gebruiker 09:54, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you remove or change other editors' legitimate talk page comments again, as you did at Talk:Timeline of BBC One, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. TransporterMan (TALK) 19:00, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for edit warring combined with a complete, active rejection of any attempts to build a consensus, including the repeated removal of the other user's comments from multiple discussion pages.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:47, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

March 2021

Hello, I'm CommanderWaterford. I noticed that in this edit to BBC Three, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. 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. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:11, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at Live & Kicking, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Assem Khidhr (talk) 21:25, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

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:82.3.149.129 reported by User:Assem Khidhr (Result: ). Thank you. Assem Khidhr (talk) 21:33, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Good Morning Britain - Adil Ray

Your recent editing history at Good Morning Britain (2014 TV programme) 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. - X201 (talk) 07:23, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

April 2021

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to BBC One, 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. Unexplained content removal of free-to-air. Mxtt.prior (talk) 16:08, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to BBC Two, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Unexplained content removal of free-to-air Mxtt.prior (talk) 16:09, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at CBBC idents. 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. Mxtt.prior (talk) 16:09, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Edit warring at Good Morning Britain (2014 TV programme)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 months for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Per a complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. Continuation of the pattern of disruption for which you were blocked one month back in December. EdJohnston (talk) 16:32, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

82.3.149.129 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I had time to reflect and I admit I may have gone a bit too far, I only edited on what I thought was right for that page, and I do sometimes try my best to make the page as good as possible, but of course I admit I caused disruption to editing which is why I've been blocked, Of course if I hadn't got involved in edit warring and caused disruption then none of this would've happened, I take absolute and total responsibility for what I've done and therefore I would like to apologise for the stress I may have caused and I promise it won't happen again. It is an awful fault of mine and I'm utterly ashamed of it. Thank you. — Preceding User talk:82.3.149.129 comment added by 82.3.149.129 (talk • contribs)

Decline reason:

No thanks. Yamla (talk) 10:45, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

No, you haven't "made mistakes". You knew perfectly well what you were doing. You chose to ignore warnings, and also edit-warring was by no means the only problem with your editing. None of it was "mistakes"; it was calculated and deliberate. You may be lucky enough to find that a very liberal administrator will come along and accept this unblock request, but as far as I am concerned (and I am confident most other administrators too) I am not willing to unblock you unless you can give a much more convincing indication that you really do understand 'all of the problems there were with your editing. JBW (talk) 21:57, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

---