User talk:Cobalt47

Your edits to the SWP (November 2020)
I would appreciate it if you took your changes to the SWP talk page before you made such controversial edits. The repeated removal of large pieces of content without even a discussion is not a productive way of editing. Please consider WP:BRD before continuing.

Also I don't appreciate your edit summary for this edit, please make consideration of WP:CIVIL & WP:AGF before continuing. Alssa1 (talk) 16:49, 12 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Just to add that the removed substantive content had been discussed on the talk page and a consensus reached. If you want to challenge the consensus, use the talk page. As a newly active editor, you might also want to familiarise yourself with Wikipedia policy on external links at WP:EXT, on which based their removal of the long list. BobFromBrockley (talk) 09:04, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

December 2022
Your recent editing history at Socialist Workers Party (UK) 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; read about 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.Please take your disagreement to talk before engaging in mass reversions. Alssa1 (talk) 22:36, 18 December 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. Alssa1 (talk) 03:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

December 2022
 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain pages (Socialist Workers Party (UK)) for a years-long history of edit warring and incivility. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 07:17, 19 December 2022 (UTC)