User talk:Yusiffuctd

October 2021
Hello, I'm JPxG. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Third Crusade, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. jp×g 04:09, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Dewritech. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Third Crusade, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you.  Dewritech (talk)  11:09, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Eighth Crusade, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.  Dewritech (talk)  11:10, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Dewritech. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Bajaur Campaign, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you.  Dewritech (talk)  10:08, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Warning
Your recent editing history at Third Crusade 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. --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:42, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

October 2021 - again
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Third Crusade, you may be blocked from editing. - Arjayay (talk) 10:19, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Complaint about you on my talk page
Hello Yusiffuctd. Please see User talk:EdJohnston, where an editor has complained about your editing of Third Crusade. He states that you are edit warring on the infobox. Please be aware that edit warring is blockable. You can respond to the complaint if you wish. EdJohnston (talk) 16:27, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

October 2021 - again - again
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Second Crusade. - Arjayay (talk) 13:27, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Battle of Nicopolis, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. - Arjayay (talk) 13:28, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Edit warring at Third Crusade
 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 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:. Per a complaint on my talk page, after a prior warning which can still be seen higher up on this page. EdJohnston (talk) 14:01, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

November 2021
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

I noticed your recent edit to Battle of the Yarmuk does not have an edit summary.&#32;Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:


 * User contributions
 * Recent changes
 * Watchlists
 * Revision diffs
 * IRC channels
 * Related changes
 * New pages list
 * Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting. Thanks! ☿ Apaugasma  ( talk  ☉) 10:52, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Fifth siege of Gibraltar, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. ☿ Apaugasma  ( talk  ☉) 10:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Battle of the Yarmuk. ☿ Apaugasma  ( talk  ☉) 11:30, 27 November 2021 (UTC)