User talk:79.0.198.13

February 2017
Hello, I'm PatGallacher. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person   on Petronella Wyatt, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. 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! PatGallacher (talk) 23:28, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

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 Petronella Wyatt. Thank you. PatGallacher (talk) 23:37, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Petronella Wyatt. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Quasar G. (talk) 00:19, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge
blogspot - this source is not good for adding your claim - please read WP:BLP and WP:RS thanks Govindaharihari (talk) 23:56, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello - you need to discuss this - BLOGSPOT is not a correct source on wikipedia - please see and read wp:reliable source _ Govindaharihari (talk) 00:07, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Prince George of Cambridge, you may be blocked from editing. Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Prince George of Cambridge was changed by 79.0.198.13 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.913637 on 2017-02-05T00:15:02+00:00. Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 00:15, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

This has now been reported to Administrator action against vandalism. PatGallacher (talk) 00:31, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Editing Wikipedia
I wish to state that none of the recent changes I have made are untrue or meant to cause disruption- and so am puzzled why my references are repeatedly being described as 'not good for Wikipedia' and my changes referred to as 'vandalism'. Please enlighten me or at the very least conserve the most recent additions.79.0.198.13 (talk) 00:38, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Prince George of Cambridge. Jim1138 (talk) 00:41, 5 February 2017 (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.

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for contravening Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. Materialscientist (talk) 00:43, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Repeated removals
If your edit is undone, instead of adding that information again, you should ask. What you need to do for citations is covered in the links above. Per wp:NOTRS, blogs are not an acceptable source as they are not under editorial review and one can add most anything with little consequence. See (again) wp:reliable sources and wp:citing sources. Jim1138 (talk) 00:48, 5 February 2017 (UTC)