December 2020

edit

  Hello, I'm DoubleGrazing. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Gordon Brown, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please stop adding 'public policy analyst' to articles on politicians or civil servants, as you did on Ed Miliband, Melanie Dawes and Gordon Brown, without backing this up with a reliable source reference that expressly supports that statement. I've just reverted those three changes; please don't revert them back without discussing on the respective talk pages first. Thank you, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:58, 18 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

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.

May 2021

edit

  Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to NoFap. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. See especially WP:PSCI. tgeorgescu (talk) 18:49, 27 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

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.
 

Your recent editing history 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. Acroterion (talk) 13:56, 29 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

January 2023

edit

  Hello, I'm Schminnte. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to David Gold (businessman) 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 or the Help desk. Thanks. Schminnte (talk contribs) 18:31, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

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.