User talk:184.145.22.163

April 2021
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Barbara Pit massacre, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. SunDawn (talk) 02:12, 15 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 Barbara Pit massacre. 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. Doremo (talk) 02:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Barbara Pit massacre. 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. Doremo (talk) 03:35, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Please do not add unsourced or original content. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. SunDawn (talk) 05:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Barbara Pit massacre. HelenDegenerate (talk) 21:16, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. SunDawn (talk) 05:31, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week 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:. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 21:19, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

May 2021
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Barbara Pit massacre. 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. Doremo (talk) 03:58, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.


 * You are the one who initiated the original edit war, because you seemingly wish to whitewash fascist collaborators 184.145.22.163 (talk) 03:59, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You seem very sure that you are right about this, and you describe your edits as being grounded in historical fact. Can you please bring those facts and sources to the talk page to convince other editors. If you are blocked again for edit-warring, the result will be that none of those facts or sources will be shared with other editors or readers. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 04:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

June 2021
Hello, I'm Mattplaysthedrums. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Roman Protasevich 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.   Mattplaysthedrums (talk) 00:53, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Roman Protasevich, you may be blocked from editing. Mattplaysthedrums (talk) 00:58, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

July 2021
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on China Central Television. 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. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 23:03, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

 You have been blocked temporarily from editing 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:. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 23:09, 22 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Yet more proof that WP is controlled by a right-wing pro-imperialist clique that seeks to suppress any information that does not conform to their narrative! 184.145.22.163 (talk) 23:13, 22 July 2021 (UTC)