User talk:79.101.140.54

BQ
Please stop removing info from the Bloc Quebecois page. Bring your reasons for removal to its talkpage & seek a consensus. GoodDay (talk) 18:21, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I just fix vandalism, unsourced or original reseach is for blogs and not for encyclopedia and just can mislead and confuse readers. 79.101.140.54 (talk) 18:24, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * You're edit-warring, which isn't permitted. Bring your arguments to that article's talkpage. Repeatedly removing mass info, will only lead to your getting blocked. GoodDay (talk) 18:26, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Removing not sourced vandalism or original research and you keep to add it. Removing vandalism is ok and not edit war but you adding it is the problem. Find sources or stop doing vandalism as you can get reported. 79.101.140.54 (talk) 18:30, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Wise up. GoodDay (talk) 18:31, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * It does not matter, as you are edit warring Chip3004 (talk) 18:35, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Not to mention, exhibiting SPA & OWN behaviour. GoodDay (talk) 18:38, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Bloc Québécois 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. Chip3004 (talk) 18:38, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * He's not gonna respond anymore. As he feels he's won, over at the page-in-question. GoodDay (talk) 18:45, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

I just saw one problem and acted, didn't wanted any bad stuff or so and for me is not any personal question, not mine problem just saw it when was reading. 79.101.140.54 (talk) 18:50, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Your behaviour is the problem. Instead of repeatedly removing info, you should've brought your concerns to the talkpage. But you were too 'fixated' on getting your own way. GoodDay (talk) 18:54, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Removing References from Bloc Québécois is not the way to go, and what your doing is also considered as Blanking/Removal of content. Chip3004 (talk) 20:12, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at Bloc Québécois, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Chip3004 (talk) 20:13, 11 July 2022 (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. Chip3004 (talk) 18:41, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

July 2022
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Bloc Québécois. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although 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. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 19:49, 11 July 2022 (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.