User talk:Minhle20002013

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on. Again, welcome!--Mishae (talk) 04:30, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

2014 AFF Suzuki Cup
This article doesn't even mention Australia taking part in qualifying, http://english.vietnamnet.vn/fms/sports/82984/vietnam-is-not-the-seed-at-aff-cup-2014.html Druryfire (talk) 17:35, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

==

2014 AFF Suzuki Cup
The edits you made were based on nothing and the texts you 'wrote' were completely copy-pasted (since they were written in the past tense) from the following article: 2012 AFF Suzuki Cup qualification I would also request that you take steps to delete the article: '2014 AFF Suzuki Cup qualification,' for qualification is scrapped for the 2014 edition. And Australia will participate in 2016, not yet in 2014.

Mind your steps,

GioGyan (talk) 18:43, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Lleyton Hewitt
Template:Lleyton Hewitt has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. NSH002 (talk) 00:49, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Australian Labor Party
Cease edit warring immediately. Timeshift (talk) 03:31, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Again. Stop. Timeshift (talk) 16:19, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

August 2014
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Australian Labor Party. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. AlanS (talk) 09:17, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Disambiguation link notification for August 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cao Pi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wei. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sima Zhao, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jin Dynasty. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 2005 Ho Chi Minh City Open


The article 2005 Ho Chi Minh City Open has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * Unreferenced, violates WP:Sportsevent

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 18:02, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Prime Minister of Australia
Hello, Here are some references which attest to the PM being the leader of the party which has the confidence of the House of Representatives, ,. Nick-D (talk) 10:26, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Please stop edit warring. You will be blocked if this continues. Please read the sources provided above - the first one in particular is very clear. If you believe that the results for both houses of parliament are relevant to determining who's appointed the PM, please provide reliable sources to support such a contention (spoiler though: it's not correct). Nick-D (talk) 10:44, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Really do stop this nonsense. The role of PM is not written into the Constitution, and how they're appointed is determined by a convention which has been in place since Federation. As the above sources state and the article notes. You will be blocked if this disruption continues. Nick-D (talk) 10:47, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

February 2018
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. Nick-D (talk) 11:16, 26 February 2018 (UTC)


 * In your last set of edits you not only ignored highly reliable sources, but misrepresented the source you gave (it makes no mention of issues around supply). You will be blocked from editing if this continues. Please discuss this issue on the article's talk page rather than continue to edit war. Nick-D (talk) 11:20, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Peter Dutton
Please read WP:SECONDARY, Wikipedia is not a synthesis of applying constitutional law to events, Wikipedia relies on secondary sources such as ABC News which says Peter Dutton has resigned. It does not matter what the Governor General has or has not done, what matters is what reliable sources say. Onetwothreeip (talk) 02:27, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Please also stop edit warring, noting the above sanctions if you continue. Nick-D (talk) 03:20, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

November 2019
Your recent editing history at High Court of Australia 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 don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Three different editors have reverted your attempts to add a theoretical point to the infobox. It is time to stop editing the article & instead take it to the talk page where there is a section waiting for your contribution. --Find bruce (talk) 22:43, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. --Find bruce (talk) 04:59, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. --Find bruce (talk) 09:11, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Edit warring at High Court of Australia
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. 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:. The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. --EdJohnston (talk) 18:57, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

September 2020
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Communist Party of Vietnam, you may be blocked from editing. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 18:33, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Liberal Party of Australia, you may be blocked from editing. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 11:11, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

September 2022
Your recent editing history at Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor 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. PICKLEDICAE🥒 20:39, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. PICKLEDICAE🥒 21:24, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

September 2022
 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Archie Mountbatten-Windsor. 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:. Bbb23 (talk) 21:47, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)