User talk:Bookishness


 * } &#9790;Loriendrew&#9789;   &#9743;(talk)  00:30, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks, User:Loriendrew! :) --Bookishness (talk) 00:44, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Automatic invitation to visit WP:Teahouse sent by HostBot

 * Thanks, Bot. --Bookishness (talk) 20:50, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=575344828 your edit] to Quartiere Campo dei Fiori may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:30, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The Villaggio Campo dei Fiori was built in 1919 by the Social Housing Institute (IACP) in response to the

partition of india
The article has an inuse tag, please don't edit until I'm done. Fowler&amp;fowler «Talk»  01:55, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, User:Fowler&amp;fowler. I did not notice it. I will bear that in mind. :) --Bookishness (talk) 02:08, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I wish to point out that you are presenting a Pakistani Muslim point-of-view, which is clearly visible in your calling Direct Action Day a day hoped by Muslim League to be peaceful when it is a well-established fact that it was designed to be a violent and in Jinnah's words "unconstitutional" "war".--Bookishness (talk) 02:10, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors&#32; according to your reverts at Partition of India. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. S M S  Talk 02:38, 2 October 2013 (UTC)