User talk:Andy101101

edit war warning
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Crucifixion of Jesus‎. 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. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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. Jytdog (talk) 05:30, 30 December 2014 (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.

December 2014
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Crucifixion of Jesus has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.


 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Crucifixion of Jesus was changed by Andy101101 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.950077 on 2014-12-30T05:34:08+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 05:34, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Crucifixion of JC
Unfortunately, won't fly. Please avoid that sort of thing, even if true. Please be constructive elsewhere. Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 05:37, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Crucifixion of Jesus with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 05:38, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Crucifixion of Jesus, you may be blocked from editing. Jim1138 (talk) 05:40, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Crucifixion of Jesus. – Majora4  (leave a message)   05:41, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

This is your last warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Crucifixion of Jesus. 05:43, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Evidence
I agree. Argue it in talk:Crucifixion of Jesus. Don't edit war. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 05:45, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

December 2014
Your recent editing history at Crucifixion of Jesus‎ shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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 BRD 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 your 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. Haminoon (talk) 05:57, 30 December 2014 (UTC) You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. 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 appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Materialscientist (talk) 06:23, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Prader-Willi
Was already mentioned under genetics. Best Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 06:00, 1 January 2015 (UTC)