User talk:221.147.40.123

October 2023
Hello, I'm Wesoree. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Punggol MRT/LRT station 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 or the Help desk. Thanks. --  Wesoree  ( talk · contribs ) 14:58, 12 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Explain? 221.147.40.123 (talk) 14:59, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Punggol MRT/LRT station, 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. 𝑭𝒊𝒍𝒎𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 (talk) 15:00, 12 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Quit slapping automatic pages and explain WHY you're actually reverting. There IS a valid reason. 221.147.40.123 (talk) 15:02, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Punggol MRT/LRT station, you may be blocked from editing. --  Wesoree  ( talk · contribs ) 15:02, 12 October 2023 (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.


 * Did you not read what I said above? Or are you going to continue slapping me with these templates? 221.147.40.123 (talk) 15:09, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * You are edit warring and have violated the WP:3RR rule. Your deletion is original research. The users who reverted you may not have seen your replies as you didn't ping or mention them. —asparagusus   (interaction)  sprouts!  15:19, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * . I've never seen removal of material to be called original research. Usually, it is added material that isn't supported by a reliable source that is regarded as original research. Could you please clarify your reply? Thanks. —⁠andrybak (talk) 19:42, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello Andrybak! Now that I think about it, maybe it wasn't the right choice to call it original research. I believe that I meant to call in WP:NPOV. The IP was removing the information based on opinions that they had, and I suppose they couldn't really use a source to prove that the event wasn't notable. Sorry about that! Happy editing! —asparagusus   (interaction)  sprouts!  22:11, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Dear IP editor. I'm sorry this had to happen to you. You have indeed violated the three-reverts rule. You kept asking people for clarification here – Special:Diff/1179803919, Special:Diff/1179804377, Special:Diff/1179805378 – but only the third question got a response, after the block.

For future reference, I recommend following a strict BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, BRD for short. In this case, if BRD is applied then you should have gone to the article's talk page, Talk:Punggol MRT/LRT station, to discuss your proposal right after the first revert. Communication to achieve consensus is key. —⁠andrybak (talk) 19:42, 13 October 2023 (UTC)