User talk:Nguyen Do Hoang Dai

November 2013
Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to First Indochina War, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. You obviously feel strongly about this, please discuss it on the article talk page. Ian Rose (talk) 20:37, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at First Indochina War. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. Anotherclown (talk) 21:45, 15 November 2013 (UTC) The Viet Minh clearly won the First Indochina war why?

-The French withdrew from Indochina -Viet Minh won the battle of Dien Bien Phu which was the battle that decided the outcome of the war -Every textbook,article,and video says that the First Indochina war ended in Viet Minh victory and humiliation for the French -The French did not achieve their objective -The Viet Minh did achieve their objective which was to push the French out(Nguyen Do Hoang Dai (talk) 22:08, 15 November 2013 (UTC)).

I feel very strongly about this because this is my country's history. You guys are being very unfair and bias.you guys just put whatever you think is right when you don't know the history. You guys just do what ever you guys want because you guys are admin. How am I vandalizing this article when in the beginning when this article was made it says that the Viet Minh won. I'am just putting what it use to say. (Nguyen Do Hoang Dai (talk) 22:17, 15 November 2013 (UTC))


 * Per WP:BRD you need to discuss this on the talkpage and establish a consensus before making the edit. This has been made perfectly clear to you. Anotherclown (talk) 22:51, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at First Indochina War, you may be blocked from editing. Anotherclown (talk) 22:53, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Automatic invitation to visit WP:Teahouse sent by HostBot
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors&#32; according to your reverts at Vietnam War. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:28, 18 November 2013 (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. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:32, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

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. William Thweatt TalkContribs 00:13, 19 November 2013 (UTC)