User talk:185.104.195.104

Welcome!
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Someone using this IP address, 185.104.195.104, has made edits to Cabinet of Israel that do not conform to our policies and therefore have been reverted. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you did not do this, you may wish to consider [ getting a username] to avoid confusion with other editors. If you'd like to experiment with the syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.

You don't have to log in to read or edit pages on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free, requires no personal information, and has many benefits. Without a username, your IP address is used to identify you.

Some good links for newcomers are:
 * Help contents – the main help page.
 * Quick guide – a "cheatsheet" listing the main editing commands.
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Tutorial

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and a timestamp. If you need help, check out Questions, ask the Help Desk, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Again, welcome! &#8213; Qwerfjkl  (please use&#32; on reply) 16:18, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

June 2021
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Romani Americans, 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. ''You have removed referenced material. Please discuss such changes on the article's talk page first.'' Ifnord (talk) 18:37, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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.  Tol  &#124; talk &#124; contribs 18:38, 10 June 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 may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Romani Americans.   -- DaxServer (talk) 18:39, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Romani Americans 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. Tol &#124; talk &#124; contribs 18:41, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

 Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. 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:. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:42, 10 June 2021 (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.

Romani Americans
Hey there. I didn't intend to delete all your changes, only the last one. You're right that there are a few unreferenced or very underreferenced sections, and I'm fine with removing those for the time being. However, the statement that "Google books isn't a reliable source" isn't so. Google books is not the source. The books themselves are the source. The links to Google Books are included to make it easier for those who don't have easy access to the books to see the reference itself. Are there books that are unreliable? Yes. But being scanned by Google doesn't make a source less reliable. I'm going to try to go in an delete the truly unsourced information, while leaving the sourced information in there. This is a lot easier to do if there's no edit warring while I do it. Plandu (talk) 18:44, 10 June 2021 (UTC)