User talk:Dumpyxx

November 2019
Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Sandro Salsano, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. – Aranya (talk) 21:10, 18 November 2019 (UTC) Dear aranya issues have been solved Unfortunately some contributors don’t understand economy or seems they want to claim the sole power over articles

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Sandro Salsano, you may be blocked from editing. – Aranya (talk) 23:41, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Lars Windhorst. ''The link works just fine, and it supports the claim. Even if it had not worked, it should not be removed. Just tag dead links so the bot will attempt to find an archived copy.'' Meters (talk) 23:43, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Sandro Salsano. 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 lose their editing privileges. 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 result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 23:49, 18 November 2019 (UTC)


 * I would like to protect my version of a page as Aranya doesn’t seem to have knowledge of spanish and its frustrating that my work gets undone


 * If the page were to be protected, it would be in the status quo version before your edits. You need to discuss your edits on the talk page and get consensus before the changes will be accepted into the article. —C.Fred (talk) 23:55, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Would you like to self-revert this edit, which violates the three-revert rule? —C.Fred (talk) 23:56, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * And please stop making unsourced changes. You cannot change the data and leave the old source as you have done on several pages I have looked at. Meters (talk) 23:58, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, the disruption by the IP editors has led to the page being semi-protected...to the version before your edits. —C.Fred (talk) 01:00, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Sandro Salsano 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 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 don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.''Last chance. You have already broken 3RR. Either discuss these changes (the issues have already been raised on the talk page) or leave it alone. It's up to you to get consensus for your changes.'' Meters (talk) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. The discussion is about the topic Sandro Salsano. Thank you. Contribuine34 (talk) 14:57, 21 August 2022 (UTC)