User talk:190.148.209.95

June 2020
Hello, I'm Chiswick Chap. I noticed that you recently removed content from Éowyn without adequately explaining why. The content was reliably cited, and even if you didn't like it, which I'm obviously sorry about, that wouldn't be an adequate rationale for its deletion. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:44, 1 June 2020 (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 stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Éowyn, you may be blocked from editing. ''STOP! This is not acceptable. If you wish to discuss the matter, you can do that here, on my talk page, or on the article's talk page: feel free to say whatever you want, and I'll reply. '' Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:20, 15 June 2020 (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.

'''Es posible que se bloquee la edición sin previo aviso la próxima vez que destroces Wikipedia, como hiciste en Éowyn. Lamento mucho que piense que puede forzar su cambio no consensuado mediante la edición de guerra. El punto más obvio al respecto es que no funciona: muchos editores lo revertirán libremente, al igual que los robots automatizados, por lo que no logrará nada más que meterse en problemas. Editar-guerra se considera totalmente inaceptable aquí en Wikipedia. Si tiene una razón o un punto válido, por favor dígalo, yo y otros editores lo escucharemos y discutiremos con usted.'''

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Éowyn. I am very sorry that you think you can force your non-consensual change through by edit-warring. The most obvious point about that is that it does not work - many editors will freely revert you, as will automated bots, so you will achieve nothing other than getting yourself into trouble. Edit-warring is considered entirely unacceptable here on Wikipedia. If you have a valid reason or point to make, please say so, I and other editors will listen and discuss it with you. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:37, 15 June 2020 (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.

Your recent editing history at Éowyn 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. GimliDotNet (talk) 19:07, 15 June 2020 (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.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as done at Éowyn. 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:. Favonian (talk) 19:09, 15 June 2020 (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.

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. GimliDotNet (talk) 04:59, 17 June 2020 (UTC)