User talk:DecusEtTutamen

October 2016
Hello, I'm Mtpaley. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Walbottle Campus— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mtpaley (talk) 20:39, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Walbottle Campus. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 21:28, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Your recent editing history 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 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 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. Whpq (talk) 21:31, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

February 2017
Hello, I'm Excirial. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Walbottle Campus— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 22:18, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Lilly Bapworth


A tag has been placed on Lilly Bapworth, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. GSMR (talk) 22:23, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

May 2017
Hello, I'm Hello71. Your recent edit appears to have added incorrect information, so I have removed it for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ⁓ Hello  71  17:53, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I'm 72. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Thorp Academy— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. —72 talk / contribs 19:06, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. ⁓ Hello  71  02:10, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. ⁓ Hello  71  13:35, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

June 2017
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia. ⁓ Hello  71  12:22, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

June 2017
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Walbottle Campus has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 20:47, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * 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: Walbottle Campus was changed by DecusEtTutamen (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.931202 on 2017-06-25T20:47:15+00:00.

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. Widr (talk) 21:00, 25 June 2017 (UTC)