User talk:Doop2009

Minor edits
Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Women's Equality Party, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Bondegezou (talk) 14:37, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

December 2018
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Mike Gapes. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and 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 Wikipedia. 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. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Mifter (talk) 02:33, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

July 2019
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Labour Party (UK). Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and 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 Wikipedia. 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. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:23, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

September 2019
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Ian Austin, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:01, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Ian Austin, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Lard Almighty (talk) 12:55, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

November 2019
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to remove Articles for deletion notices or comments from articles and Articles for deletion pages, as you did at Ruth Alcroft, you may be blocked from editing. Domeditrix (talk) 16:26, 21 November 2019 (UTC)