User talk:81.159.166.31

April 2020
Hello, I'm Mr.Sarcastic. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Suki Potier 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 Teahouse. Thanks. Mr.Sarcastic (talk) 15:10, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * With a name like that, here's something you will understand. Piss off and improve articles you mindless turd. The copy says she is one film (small role) and was in another film as a result of archive footage. 81.159.166.31 (talk) 16:45, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you purposefully and blatantly harass fellow Wikipedian(s) again, as you did at User talk:81.159.166.31, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. JamesHSmith6789 (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for bringing up the old Wikipedia Jim Crow laws of Wikipedia. I try and improve article with WP:GF. But then a "titled" wikipedian then reverts me with the temerity that what I say is no good. Of course, it's my fault. Like a woman being raped her because she was wearing the wrong type of dress, or homosexual being beaten up for camp. Same on Wikipedia, you provoked and the provoker is never wrong. But the provoked is. How dare you threaten me? This place is so one sided and hateful. You try to improve articles and instead you get nastiness and vitriol. But complain, and it's harrassment. Nasty. Pure nasty and hateful. Who comes here for that? 81.159.166.31 (talk)

Hi - We see lots of vandalism from unregistered users, so we are often much more strict. If you don't want these warnings, please refrain from telling other editors to "piss off". Make an account, make good edits, be civil, and you'll be fine. Good edits, such as the ones you have made in the past are allowed. See WP:CIV for more information. JamesHSmith6789 (talk) 16:59, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Suki Potier 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. Matthew hk (talk) 18:31, 15 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.