User talk:70.74.111.54

November 2020
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Giacomo Puccini, 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. Favonian (talk) 10:32, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

June 2021
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Regis Philbin. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.  General Ization Talk  04:31, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Regis Philbin, you may be blocked from editing. MPFitz1968 (talk) 06:11, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Regis Philbin. MPFitz1968 (talk) 19:46, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Regis Philbin 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. MPFitz1968 (talk) 23:03, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Blocked
You received numerous warnings above regarding the inappropriate use of primary sources on a article about a recently deceased person, and yet you continued. I have blocked your IP address from editing that article for 48 hours. Please discuss this proposed change on the talk page, Talk:Regis Philbin. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 05:04, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Given your statement that you will continue this disruptive editing when your block finishes, I've extended your block to 3 months. Daniel (talk) 19:27, 7 June 2021 (UTC)