User talk:La-difrickin-da

January 2012
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Geoffrey Chaucer, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.
 * Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place " " on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Geoffrey Chaucer was changed by La-difrickin-da (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.882652 on 2012-01-16T19:42:27+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 19:42, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Geoffrey Chaucer with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 19:49, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. 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. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Geoffrey Chaucer, you may be blocked from editing. Ramaksoud2000 (talk to me) 20:44, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Geoffrey Chaucer. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 20:52, 16 January 2012 (UTC)