User talk:Hockeypro2000

April 2020
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Jagmeet Singh. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:41, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Michael J. Fox, you may be blocked from editing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:34, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Martin Brodeur, you may be blocked from editing. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:19, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

May 2020
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at University of Toronto. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you.  freshacconci  (✉) 08:37, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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 noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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:. Ad Orientem (talk) 17:42, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Your editing history has raised serious doubts in my mind as to whether or not you are here to build an encyclopedia. When your block expires you should tread very carefully. If your editing does not drastically improve, your next block will be indefinite. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:44, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Already I've reverted edits you've made at two more articles as they go against an established consensus (Ted Cruz, Andrew Scheer). May I also ask you please not to mark edits as "minor" that are not minor edits. Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 01:56, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * And now, can you please explain why you are ignoring the guideline MOS:DATERET, on the article Maitreyi Ramakrishnan? Your edits are disruptive, albeit in a very minor way. It certainly does not help that you don't use edit summaries. It is a courtesy to your fellow editors to communicate, at least a little. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 21:31, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

You've added this photo and claim that it is your "own work"? That means you photographed her..? Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 21:38, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. 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:. Doug Weller talk 12:06, 17 May 2020 (UTC)