User talk:Tev123456789

August 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Perth, Western Australia. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. The-Pope (talk) 10:35, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Perth, Western Australia, you may be blocked from editing. Bidgee (talk) 10:46, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. OhNo itsJamie Talk 13:48, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 12 hours for disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. PhilKnight (talk) 14:27, 20 August 2010 (UTC) PhilKnight (talk) 14:35, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * To clarify, as the blocking admin, I'm not accusing you of vandalism, but in my opinion you were being disruptive.
 * Examples of your disruptive behaviour:
 * Your first edit summary was misleading.
 * You edit warred without discussion.
 * You called another editor a bigot.
 * Finally, a note to other admins: feel free to modify this block without contacting me.

I see that, in the course of your editing, you have repeatedly removed content because you do not want it to be there, with no attempt to discuss the changes, despite the fact that several other editors have shown a consensus that the material should be kept. That is not how Wikipedia works. If you disagree with the other editors then please discuss the issue on the article's talk page. In addition to this, your edit summaries have not always been civil, as required by Wikipedia policy. Finally, in this edit you gave the edit summary "Fixed some spelling and grammar mistakes in the history section", despite the fact that your edit made very extensive changes, and had nothing to do with spelling and grammar mistakes. It is inconceivable that you thought that edit summary was an accurate description of your edit. I strongly urge you to rethink how you edit, or you will be likely to be blocked for a much longer period. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:30, 20 August 2010 (UTC)