User talk:Lincolnreviewer

August 2020
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Education in England. 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. ''Please discuss your edits on the article's talkpage per WP:BRD. Some of your edit was simply wrong. It violated WP:MOS and it linked to an inappropriate article, for example,'' Meters (talk) 04:03, 1 August 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.

Your recent editing history at Education in England 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 do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.''I still don't know if you are trolling simply not competent to edit Wikipedia per WP:CIR. Discuss the edits on the talk page or leave the article alone. Your edit summary was completely wrong. You did not address either of the problems I listed.'' Meters (talk) 04:17, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Meters, I don't know the problems you listed because you haven't said to me the problems. Could you please list me the errors you see? I'd greatly appreciate it

August 2020
Your proposed edit to Education in England has been reverted multiple times by multiple users. Please discuss this edit on the talk page and try to gain consensus for the changes proposed rather than continually reverting. Robminchin (talk) 07:52, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Education in England. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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. 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:. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:32, 1 August 2020 (UTC)