User talk:Lapd12

June 2015
Hello, I'm Conifer. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Port of Los Angeles, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Conifer (talk ) 19:39, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

February 2018
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Los Angeles Port Police. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 16:19, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

If you represent the Los Angeles Police Department, you will need to review the conflict of interest policy and the paid editing policy. Whether you do or not, please do not blank article content to put a spam link for a job application. 331dot (talk) 16:21, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

I would add that the structure and makeup of a public agency such as a police department is certainly not confidential information, and is not only valid article content, but probably essential to such an article. If you have any concerns, please discuss them on the article talk page. Thanks 331dot (talk) 16:27, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Los Angeles Port Police, you may be blocked from editing. Samf4u (talk) 16:29, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

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 Los Angeles Port Police. 331dot (talk) 16:36, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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. Neil N  talk to me 16:55, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 12 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) 17:03, 11 February 2018 (UTC)