User talk:217.71.190.199

January 2021
Hello, I'm Eyebeller. I noticed that in this edit to Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2021, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Eyebeller 09:24, 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.


 * This was a mistake – this IP was removing vandalism added by User:2.94.180.213. I cannot restore the page because I have already reached WP:3RR.  dummelaksen   (talk • contribs) 09:27, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

October 2021
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Edward Zammit Lewis, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Equine-man (talk) 10:20, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

April 2022
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Deborah Sampson, 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. Thank you. Suonii180 (talk) 10:22, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Jutta Rüdiger, you may be blocked from editing. Peaceray (talk) 15:30, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Eleonore Prochaska. Peaceray (talk) 15:31, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

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 History of women in the Italian Resistance. Peaceray (talk) 15:31, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Ranks and insignia of the German Women's Auxiliary Services. Peaceray (talk) 15:33, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Deborah Sampson. Peaceray (talk) 16:27, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Rayna Kasabova. You removed the fact that she was a nurse before becoming a pilot. Peaceray (talk) 17:10, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

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 List of female American Civil War soldiers. Peaceray (talk) 17:15, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Women in combat. Peaceray (talk) 17:19, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Please consider creating articles for Women in Red rather than chronocentrist negationism
I have seen some edits from several IP addresses, including this one, that attempt to suppress aspects of women's history. While I believe that these edits are an attempt at historical revisionism, I think that they are actually a chronocentrist approach that is historical negationism. Please consider that this is actually a form of antifeminism because it denies those actual conditions that women had to overcome.

If you truly want to advance how women are covered in Wikipedia, I strongly encourage you to explore WikiProject Women in Red, which seeks to create, translate, and improve biographies of notable women. Any effort towards this would be far more productive than any attempts to negate women's history. Peaceray (talk) 05:09, 31 July 2022 (UTC)