User talk:81.111.193.130

November 2013

Hello, I'm Abce2. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Rugeley because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, you can use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Abce2 (talk) 19:56, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Rugeley with this edit. 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. CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 20:13, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Rugeley with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 20:17, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Rugeley. CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 20:27, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How many times do you need to be told? STOP removing the information on Kyle Webster on the page Rugeley. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.111.193.130 (talk)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule. 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 would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:47, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

81.111.193.130, we remove the content because it doesn't have any citations to verify its reliability. It also involved "quest to finding his own penis", which obviously isn't going to be bought by anybody. Please do not continue to add this even when so many users have reverted and WARNED you. Thank you. K6ka (talk) 20:49, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Andrew Hughes (rugby union) 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 Help Desk. Materialscientist (talk) 11:56, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.