User talk:2600:387:8:9:0:0:0:56

December 2016
Hello, I'm Dan D. Ric. An edit that you recently made to Social studies seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Dan D. Ric (talk) 17:34, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

January 2018
Hello, I'm Serols. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Mike Smith (ice hockey, born 1982)— because it did not appear constructive. 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. Serols (talk) 16:15, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

April 2018
Hello, I'm Tdts5. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Khairallah Talfah 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 Help Desk. Thanks. Tdts5 (talk) 17:53, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Henderson, Nevada
The crime data you added to Henderson, Nevada is kind of stale. Are you able to find more recent data? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:00, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Magnolia677 (talk) The data was already in the article and was removed by another user without good reason. And yes, Henderson has recently been ranked in these lists as well. 05:00, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking part of my advice. Unfortunately, you left the stale data in your edit, and added new data that was either not supported by the source cited,  or not notable.  Regarding safety in Henderson, you wrote: "In 2015, it was ranked among the FBI safest cities nationally and in late 2017 it was again ranked among Nevada’s ten safest cities".  To support your edit you used this source, which says "Henderson...was listed at the fifth-safest city in Nevada".  There aren't a whole lot of "big cities" in Nevada, so I'm not sure being fifth is all that notable.  Also, where in the source cited does it specifically state that Henderson "ranked among the FBI safest cities nationally"?  Thank you.  Magnolia677 (talk) 23:06, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

July 2018
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Henderson, Nevada. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. John from Idegon (talk) 22:13, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Your recent editing history at Henderson, Nevada shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. John from Idegon (talk) 22:49, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Don Laughlin
Hello, why did you revert my edit on Don Laughlin? It is customary to use the edit summary field to explain why you are undoing an edit. Toohool (talk) 04:08, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

September 2018
Hello 2600:387:8:9:0:0:0:56. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to Don Laughlin, and that you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to Black hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are  required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:2600:387:8:9:0:0:0:56. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. John from Idegon (talk) 04:51, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.