User talk:108.17.71.32/Archive 1

October 2020
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Typhoon Gay (1989). 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. D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 13:20, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Blocked
I just wanted to let you know that you have been blocked from editing anything other than your talk page for the next 48 hours; vandalism that is immediately reverted is still vandalism. If you are someone who's innocently using this IP address, or have understood what you've done wrong and promise to do better, you may use the template Unblock on this page before then after reading this guide. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 13:38, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Your edits in Rigor mortis article
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&mdash;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&mdash;even if you do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Rasnaboy (talk) 17:28, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

January 2021
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to introduce jokes into articles, as you did at Burning of Washington, you may be blocked from editing. Wikipedia is a serious encyclopedia, and contributions of this type are considered vandalism.   --TheImaCow (talk) 10:50, 7 January 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.
 * 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.

January 2021
The previous warning still stands. Although I personally found your edit rather amusing. J ACKINTHE  B  OX   • TALK 14:45, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. CLCStudent (talk) 20:47, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The edits to Controlled Impact Demonstration were not vandalism, but the "More citations needed" tag still applied. Please be more careful in the future, and thanks for adding another image. Enterprisey (talk!) 00:07, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Crash test
Your edit was probably fine, but in the future, just start a talk page discussion instead of edit warring. Edit warring is highly disruptive. You may be blocked if you edit war, even if the edit was fine. Enterprisey (talk!) 06:29, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok, thank you. In the future I won't edit war. --108.17.71.32 (talk) 16:28, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

January 2021
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. CLCStudent (talk) 19:21, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk page for coups and self-coups
Hi, I saw you make an edit regarding an issue under discussion on Template:Coup d'état, but you have not posted anything on the talk page. I invite you to go to Template_talk:Coup_d%27état to discuss the matter.—Beneficii (talk) 20:13, 1 February 2021 (UTC)