User talk:Markmark12

July 2007
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Diablo (video game). Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. —DerHexer (Talk) 17:37, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

August 2008
Please stop your disruptive editing. If your vandalism continues, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.  Monster Under Your Bed  (talk) 13:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Stephanie Rice. StaticGull Talk  13:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Human sexuality
Hi there. You should give a reason in your edit summary for removing large chunks of text. Otherwise, people will assume you're editing maliciously.-Wafulz (talk) 14:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. OhNo itsJamie Talk 14:24, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * You should also watch out for the three-revert rule. You're already at the limit.-Wafulz (talk) 15:08, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not being passive aggressive, I'm trying to help. Two other editors have reverted you and you're past the three revert limit. You should use [[talk:human sexuality|the talk

page]] or you'll be listed for a short block.-Wafulz (talk) 15:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. OhNo itsJamie Talk 16:56, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Trolling after final warning
You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia  as a result of your . You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies concerning neutral point of view and biographies of living persons will not be tolerated. OhNo itsJamie Talk 00:53, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Woodstock Festival
Hi. Please don't remove cited content without discussion on the talk page. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 08:48, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. --SineBot (talk) 05:53, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

August 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. —  Jeff G. ツ  02:47, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

WP:3RR on Motion Picture Production Code
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Nakon 04:13, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Phobia
Hello. Regarding this edit, please note that one's never having heard of something is not a valid reason for removing it. I've restored the links, which led to sourced articles. If you disagree with my reasoning, please open a discussion at Talk:Phobia. Thanks. Rivertorch (talk) 21:47, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

August 2011
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Ron Paul, you may be blocked from editing. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

December 2011
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary&#32;for your edits. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you.  Mbinebri  talk &larr; 17:32, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * When you appear to be automatically reverting the edits of someone you disagree with - especially when it means doing something senseless like restoring the code for a deleted photo - without edit summaries, it's hard not see those edits as motivated by spite.   Mbinebri   talk &larr; 17:38, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

February 2013
Your recent editing history at Feminism shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. 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. Cailil  talk 21:06, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)