User talk:UCA mizzou fan

November 2014
Hello, I'm K6ka. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Jay Nixon with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  22:37, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Jay Nixon. 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. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  22:41, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Jay Nixon with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. ... disco spinster   talk  22:43, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello! Some advice
Hi UCA mizzou fan, welcome to Wikipedia! I noticed you've been repeatedly removing sourced content from the article on Jay Nixon. Please don't repeatedly remove content. Doing so is edit warring, and could lead to a block. Instead, please make a new section on the talk page of the article, Talk:Jay Nixon, and explain why you feel the content should be removed. Then, discuss it with other Wikipedia editors. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 22:44, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

November 2014
Your recent editing history at Jay Nixon 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 get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. bonadea contributions talk 22:49, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. 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. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 23:31, 28 November 2014 (UTC)