Pedrovariant

Per WP:Sock

Do not keep switching back and forth between your registered account and IPs. Do not purposely use different IPs to edit an article as though you are different people. See WP:SCRUTINY and WP:LOUTSOCK. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 08:56, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Gendered language

As I told you at the IP you are obviously using, [1] consensus of the Wikipedia community is clearly against the kind of activist edit you keep attempting repeatedly over the last few months. [2][3] This was established at this discussion [4] as well as by the fact that your changes keep getting reverted by many different editors. Consider this a warning. Now that you know how the Wikipedia community feels about this, if you try to do this anyway, you will likely be blocked just for this. This is on top of the sock-related issue of editing while logged out. -Crossroads- (talk) 04:58, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

WP:Edit warring

Do stop edit warring. Posting a proposal on the talk page, admitting that you tried to force your content in, and then going right back and adding part of the disputed content, is still edit warring. It's still you forcing your content in. It's not like there's any WP:Consensus for it simply by you posting about it on the article's talk page. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:15, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Logged out editing

Why are you editing while logged out again after being warned? [5] -Crossroads- (talk) 04:20, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

December 2019

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Girl, you may be blocked from editing. John from Idegon (talk) 01:22, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Girl. . John from Idegon (talk) 01:30, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Third gender 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. -Crossroads- (talk) 02:13, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. -Crossroads- (talk) 07:02, 15 December 2019 (UTC)