User talk:188.141.95.208

Welcome!
Hello! I noticed your contributions to Glasgow&#32;and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. You are welcome to edit anonymously; however, creating an account is free and has several benefits (for example, the ability to create pages, upload media and edit without one's IP address being visible to the public).

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! HiLo48 (talk) 05:39, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Please learn how to format references properly
I'm fed up with correcting them & will in future just revert you. Look at them afterwards & see what they look like"! Johnbod (talk) 14:47, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Okay, understood -- and thank you for your patience. Please do not bite the newcomers! 188.141.95.208 (talk) 17:33, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

May 2021
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Postal addresses in the Republic of Ireland‎, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. What you added is not reliably sourced, see WP:RS, it is just your conjecture which must be supported by a reliable source, such as a newspaper or magazine article, not just based on one random website example. ww2censor (talk) 17:10, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Totally understood. Not trying to antagonize (or get into an edit war!). You're right, it's conjecture, and even though I see it more and more, that constitutes an anecdote. All the best 188.141.95.208 (talk) 17:41, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Postal addresses in the Republic of Ireland 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. ww2censor (talk) 17:33, 3 May 2021 (UTC)