User talk:Ferkava

January 2015
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Sukhoi Su-27 has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.


 * 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: Sukhoi Su-27 was changed by Ferkava (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.953421 on 2015-01-23T23:54:39+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 23:54, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

February 2016
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Marines. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. - the WOLF  child  14:31, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Indonesian Marine Corps. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. - the WOLF  child  14:37, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Preview button
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. - the WOLF  child  14:38, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Edit summary
Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:


 * User contributions
 * Recent changes
 * Watchlists
 * Revision differences
 * IRC channels
 * Related changes
 * New pages list and
 * Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! - the WOLF  child  14:38, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

February 2016
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Ahmad Dhani.  Also, explain your edit with an edit summary.  - the WOLF  child  11:07, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Ahmad Dhani
Please don't just continuously revert your edit. Per WP:BRD, it is recommended that you discuss content disputes on the article talk page instead of engaging in an edit war. You need to support your edits with reliable sources and it is strongly encouraged that you explain your edits with an edit summary. Please review the relevant policies and guideline linked here in this comment and within the numerous warnings and notifications that have been placed on your talk page to learn to contribute to Wikipedia more effectively. Thank you. - the WOLF  child  11:48, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

February 2016
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Ahmad Dhani. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. - the WOLF  child  11:53, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

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. - the WOLF  child  12:20, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Omar Dani
Please stop repeatedly reverting the changes to this article. As with the article noted above, there are policies and guidelines that must be adhered to for disputed such as this. Once you have been reverted, you should discuss the issue on the article talk page, (or here on your talk page) per WP:BRD. You currently have an open report against you at WP:AN/EW for a WP:4RR violation, you have refused to discuss any issues at all, and now you are seeking to edit war another article? This is all unnecessary, if you would consider discussing the matter, I'm sure it could be resolved. - the WOLF  child  13:06, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

February 2016
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Omar Dani. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. - the WOLF  child  13:07, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Notice of a 2nd Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a second discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. - the WOLF  child  13:27, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

February 2016
This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at M1941 Johnson rifle, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ''This includes adding content. Either way, it must be supported by reliable sources.  - the WOLF  child '' 14:21, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Your edit on M1941 Johnson rifle
Hello. Don't add incorrect information to articles, as you did on M1941 Johnson rifle, the rifles were ordered by (and delivered in small numbers to) the KNIL in the Netherlands East Indies in 1941, not by Indonesia, since that country didn't exist until several years later. Thomas.W talk 14:25, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * - Hi, don't expect a reply. This user seems to be put off that he was reverted and his now going back through his history and reverting any and all of his edits that have been changed. This is all happened in just the past hour or so (and is still happening). After filing two 4RR reports and an AIV, plus multiple warnings, notifications and requests to discuss... I've given up. I'll wait until some remedies come along and then go and clean up what ever messes he has made. Cheers. - the WOLF  child  14:51, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Blocked for 72 hours
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistent disruptive editing of various kinds, including edit-warring on numerous articles, without ever responding to messages from other editors expressing concerns about your editing, or showing any signs of taking notice of such messages. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:01, 16 February 2016 (UTC)