User talk:Ridgeway481

February 2015
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to University of York has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.


 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: University of York was changed by Ridgeway481 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.886663 on 2015-02-27T16:06:08+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 16:06, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

University of York vandalism
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. 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. Ebonelm (talk)

Removing warnings and edit warring
Hi, Ridgeway481, and welcome! I wanted to let you know that we can still see the warnings you've received in your page history, even if you try to remove or rewrite them. It's a better idea to accept the criticism and change your behavior, or at least try to discuss the issue on talk pages (not user pages).

In addition, You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Behemoth. 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 that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: 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 and can lead to a block, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. 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.
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Finally, our policy on dates & numbers requests that you not change "CE" to "AD" without explaining yourself on the article's talk page and waiting for consensus from other users.

Thanks for your patience! I know it can be hard to learn how to work effectively in the Wikipedia community. I hope you stay on board. FourViolas (talk) 14:05, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Editing warnings
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or change other editors' legitimate talk page comments, as you did at User talk:Ridgeway481. Please be aware that your edit to my earlier warning is in violation of wikipedia policy. While users are allowed to remove comments on their own talk pages, they are not allowed to change posts made by other users, especially if it alters meaning. Your edit falsely changed my warning notice to read as though I was thanking you for your edits on the University of York page - this was not the case, your edits on that page were reverted as they were disruptive and constituted vandalism. If you continue to violate wikipedia policy I will request you are blocked. Ebonelm (talk) 17:35, 5 March 2015 (UTC)