User talk:45.50.57.253

Welcome!
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, such as the one you made on Torrance bowling alley shooting. I greatly appreciate your constructive edits on Wikipedia. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * Recent changes patrol

You are welcome to continue editing without logging in, but many editors recommend that you  [ create an account] . Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits, such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see this page. If you edit without a username, your IP address (45.50.57.253) is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place  before the question on this page.

Again, welcome! GorillaWarfare (talk) 19:18, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

February 2019
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Pittsburgh synagogue shooting has been reverted. Your edit here to Pittsburgh synagogue shooting was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pyls1iHHmwo) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. music or video) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 06:00, 9 February 2019 (UTC) If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

Hello, I'm Donner60. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Christopher Paul Hasson, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 03:25, 22 February 2019 (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.

March 2019
Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Unite the Right rally. Thank you.  Acroterion   (talk)   16:46, 17 March 2019 (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.

April 2019
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Christchurch mosque shootings, you may be blocked from editing. ST47 (talk) 01:03, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

I am adding sources and information relating to the edits I made. Next time I will be careful not to make any disruptive edits. 01:22, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Poway synagogue shooting; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Bakazaka (talk) 14:45, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Identitarian movement
Hi, I'm Rutebega. I just reverted | your pending edit to the Identitarian movement article, because I don't think it conforms with our policy on biographies of living persons (which applies to biographical info on any page). I think it's a relevant piece of information to include in that article in some form, but it won't be allowed unless it adheres to a neutral point of view and everything it says can be verified with references to reliable sources. You did include two sources for your addition, but as far as I could tell, they didn't specifically state everything mentioned in the passage you added, particularly the part about Southern's videos. That might constitute original research, which isn't allowed on Wikipedia. One other issue is that both sources are regarded as having a left-leaning bias (particularly HNH), which fails to meet the requirement for a NPOV. I bring this up with you only because I think you're on the right track, and I appreciate your desire to improve this article. I'm sure if you look, you can find more sources on the subject, maybe even here. If you need help or advice, feel free to ask me, check out the Teahouse, or type here on your talk page. Happy editing! P.S. if you're interested in editing Wikipedia, you should consider creating an account. It has some advantages! Best wishes. — Rutebega ( talk ) 06:52, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

June 2019
Please take advice from above, and the Welcome panel up top, and create an account and start learning about the basics of editing. I have had to revert two lots of edits to Islamophobia in Australia from different IP adddresses, doing exactly the same thing twice over, making the same basic mistakes. If you continue this practice, without using the talk pages to discuss, you will find yourself (and related IP addresses) blocked from editing Wikipedia, which would be a shame if you genuinely wish to contribute. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 06:23, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Walter Görlitz. An edit that you recently made to 2026 FIFA World Cup seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want to 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. ''WP:INFOBOXFLAG and WP:OVERLINK were not ignored when the article was created. There's no need to add flags and links to countries now.'' Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:23, 7 June 2019 (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 making test edits to Wikipedia, as you did to 2026 FIFA World Cup. It is considered vandalism, which, under Wikipedia policy, can lead to being blocked from editing. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:06, 7 June 2019 (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.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Canadian Football League. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:07, 7 June 2019 (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.

I am sorry about what I did, I was just trying to contribute. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.50.57.253 (talk) 20:07, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Understood. There's a reason these have not been present in these prominent articles. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:10, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Yet here you go again. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:11, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Look I didn't intend to make a disruptive edit, I'm just trying to make a contribution. Again, sorry if this was unintentional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.50.57.253 (talk) 22:12, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
 * It's clearly not unintentional. You're assuming that we have accidentally left out the names of the languages, which is not the case. You're assuming it's a specific variant of the language (Metropolitan French, Canadian French) when there's no variant implied in the short titles. You're assuming that if we were to add the language, that we would want them linked to the underlying language, which isn't necessary per WP:OVERLINK. You're not explaining why you're making the changes. You're not getting buy-in for the changes. All of these actions were intentional. I get that the disruption may have been unintentional though. Thanks for trying to improve Wikipedia!
 * So to be clear, we don't link common terms like major European languages, countries in North America or Europe or other simple concepts. That's what WP:OVERLINK is about. We don't add flags to infoboxes unless there's a very close association with the country which explained in greater detail at WP:INFOBOXFLAG. We don't need to explain which language alternate names for a subject is in, when it's in the language of the host country. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:21, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I understand, but you know there's the whole "colonial lag" thing and thus North American and South American varieties of English, Spanish and/or French sound a bit different from their original European counterparts in terms of vocabulary, spelling and pronounciation i.e. American English/Canadian English vs British English/Australian English/New Zealander English, Brazilian Portuguese vs European Portuguese, Latin American Spanish (Mexican, Argentinian etc.)/Carribbean Spanish vs European Spanish, Quebec French/non-Quebec Canadian French vs European French (France, Belgium, Switzerland). I added this in to specifically note that this is a different dialect of an existing language and in regards to flags to infoboxes I would add these in to indicate where this is taking place in.

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia 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. El_C 00:32, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Terrorism in Canada ‎, you may be blocked from editing. Meters (talk) 07:28, 30 June 2019 (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 United Patriots Front 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 don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Nobody wants to see you blocked, if your edits are challenged you need to take the edits to the talk page and work towards consensus. Bacondrum (talk) 22:13, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

July 2019
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Far-right politics in Australia. Railfan23 (talk) 05:43, 2 July 2019 (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.
 * I'm incredibly sorry I was just trying to make edits that contributed to something my apologies. 05:56, 2 July 2019 (UTC).
 * But then you got right back to it. Bacondrum (talk) 23:44, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
 * You must understand I am just trying to make edits I think are contributions based on info that's already been mentioned by credible sources and I didn't know they were disruptive so no offense if I broke any rules here. 24:02, 2 July 2019
 * So, take the time to have a little read:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Edit warring
 * Bacondrum (talk) 07:21, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
 * In regards to the neutral point of view well when I make these edits I am simply trying to add information/sources that have been officially confirmed and I usually read these to know what is known and my edits are based off them. 09:15, 3 July 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:A44D:9200:2938:1489:324C:72D5 (talk)

Regardless of what you think you are doing, you are not following the rules for editing Wikipedia. If you want to given the benefit of the doubt or taken seriously, then you need to heed the advice you've been given and read up on the basics. If you had done so, you would know, for example, that every fact you add MUST be present in the source relating to the in-line citation at the end of that particular fact, whether mid-sentence or at the end of a paragraph. It is not good enough to have read it somewhere else. Better still, create an account. You have had numerous warnings now and you won't be getting another one. You will find yourself blocked if you don't follow the rules. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 06:14, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, I already did read the rules and I understand Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view so sorry if I got into some conflict and in so far as adding sources I am doing just that by typing up a direct quote or two from someone else in these article(s) when I'm using the search results just to clarify what has been officially established by first-hand source(s). 03:09, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

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. Thank you. Bacondrum (talk) 23:11, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Further POV-pushing
Edits like this one and this one are clear examples of you continuing to push your point of view into articles. You are not including sources that support these edits. Given the articles are all contentious and the viewpoints you are adding are extremely one-sided, you would need very good reliable sources to make these kinds of edits.

You have been repeatedly warned about this specific behavior. You have promised to stop, but you are continuing on anyway. It s clear you do not understand (or are deliberately ignoring) the basic rules of Wikipedia. Regretfully, therefore, I have reported your behavior to the administrators here. Railfan23 (talk) 01:24, 6 July 2019 (UTC)


 * I'll admit I did make these mistakes there and there but okay I'll cease and might just stop making these edits like you suggested and next time I'll actually just include sources but also take a look at the article(s) and see if it has any information that lines up. I 01:54, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Notification of discussion at the Administrator's Noticeboard
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Railfan23 (talk) 01:32, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Stop x nuvola with clock.svg You have been blocked temporarily from editing for disruptive editing, POV. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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: .  User:Ymblanter (talk) 13:07, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

July 2019
You are suspected of sock puppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, then, if you wish to do so, respond to the evidence at Sockpuppet investigations/Ck4829. Thank you. Pudeo (talk) 17:21, 6 July 2019 (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.

Do not use multiple IP addresses to vandalize Wikipedia, like you did at Blade (comics). Such attempts to avoid detection or circumvent the blocking policy will not succeed. You are welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia but your recent edits have been reverted or removed. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia '''you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ' Block evasion by User:Ck4829.'' Binksternet (talk) 04:30, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't think I'm Ck4829 for starters I do not recall ever using an account with that name and even if it's in the same location it could have been someone else. 04:45, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Christchurch mosque shootings
Stop identifying as the perpetrator a person who has not yet faced trial. You have done this at multiple related articles. The person is entitled to the presumption of innocence and is currently awaiting trial. I will revert all of your edits that presume guilt before the trial takes place.

Also take note that you have incorrectly changed the victim count at several articles. Initially, 50 people died and 50 were injured. One of the injured died in hospital 6 weeks after the shootings, so the final count is 51 dead and 49 injured. Akld guy (talk) 20:58, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

August 2019
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 List of shootings in Texas. You've done this many times before; it's time to stop. AnUnnamedUser   (open talk page)  23:57, 12 August 2019 (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.

Hello, I'm Beauty School Dropout. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to 8chan seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Beauty School Dropout (talk) 02:42, 25 August 2019 (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.

September 2019
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Oswald Mosley. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 19:55, 29 September 2019 (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.

October 2019
Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Miles Morales. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 17:59, 12 October 2019 (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.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at HIAS. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 15:54, 27 October 2019 (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.

January 2020
Hello, I'm 911ChickenCop. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Monsey Hanukkah stabbing 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. 911ChickenCop (talk) 01:56, 6 January 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 refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Monsey Hanukkah stabbing. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you.  Everedux  (talk)  02:10, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

April 2020
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Stripper, you may be blocked from editing. Amkgp (talk) 18:08, 24 April 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.