User talk:75.40.18.21

Hello, I'm Horse Eye Jack. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 04:08, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Mr. Horse Eye Jack

Please do your research before putting up wrong information. You aren't respectful to our readers.

Mr. Horse Eye Jack and Mr. IceWelder

Please show some respect to our readers.

I attached the official report here. The info is in Page 3.

https://s27.q4cdn.com/984876518/files/doc_financials/2021/q2/Q2-'21-SH-letter-FINAL.pdf

Added based on that source. Next time, please add the source directly with the content addition. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 15:22, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

July 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 04:11, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Mr. Horse,

Again, please stop contaminating wikipedia by imposing your own bias and lack of judgment. If the type of destruction continues, I have to escalate the issue to higher authorities.

Thanks.

Your recent editing history 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—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—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. MrOllie (talk) 15:41, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

September 2021

Hello, I'm IceWelder. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, 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. IceWelder [✉] 14:40, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits.

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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  -- ferret (talk) 14:42, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

---