User talk:Collebud88

-

Collebud88, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Collebud88! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join other new editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from other new editors. These editors have also just begun editing Wikipedia; they may have had similar experiences as you. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from your peers. I hope to see you there! Technical 13 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:12, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jews

Please stop edit-warring over your changes at Jews. The source you added clearly says there are an "estimated 7,000 Jews living in Colombia today". How does that become 15,000–35,000? If you continue to edit-war and misrepresent what sources say, you may be blocked from editing. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 20:17, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 2015

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jews. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 20:24, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add to this. The question of how many and which languages to mention in the infobox of Jews was extensively discussed recently on the talkpage, and the consensus is to mention only those four that are mentioned at the moment. If anything, there were voices to have even less. So please do not add any more.

By the way, you used a Wikipedia article as a source. That is not allowed on Wikipedia. Debresser (talk) 23:41, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Collebud88. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 22:29, 8 August 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

October 2016

Hello, I'm Iryna Harpy. Your recent edit to the page Venezuela appears to have added incorrect information, so I have removed it for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Iryna Harpy (talk) 20:14, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to White Latin Americans, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Dhtwiki (talk) 23:16, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Changing data but not source

Guideline pages: Wikipedia:Citing sources and Wikipedia:References dos and don'ts

Introductions: Help:Introduction to referencing (Wiki Markup) and Help:Introduction to referencing (VisualEditor)

How to pages: Help:Footnotes and Help:Find sources

A screencast that walks through the essentials needed in citing your sources. (2:01 min)

This is an encyclopedia, so remember that it's a necessity to include references listing reliable websites, newspapers, articles, books and other sources you have used to write or expand articles. New articles and statements (including data) added to existing articles may be deleted by others if unreferenced or referenced poorly or if they are copyright violations.--Moxy (talk) 18:22, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mulatto is a term used to refer to persons born of one white parent and one black parent.

Mulatto is a term used to refer to persons born of one white parent and one black parent.

The term biracial in the context of the Colombian census is incorrect because the term mulatto refers to people with African ancestry. In addition people with Amerindian and European ancestries are also biracial.

Mulatto is the correct term because the biracial word refers to all persons who have racial mixing and in this case more than 50% of Colombians are biracial. You should learn to use those terms and not generate more damage to the article about Colombia.

Biracial = Having parents of two different races: (The term biracial in the context of the Colombian census is incorrect)

  Mestizo = Amerindian ancestry + European ancestry. (Mestizo is a biracial category)
  Mulatto = European ancestry + African ancestry (Mulatto is a biracial category)

The word 'mulatto' in the context of the Colombian census is correct because it specifically refers to persons who have African ancestry as a category of black people.

10.6% Black (includes Mulatto) - Correct term in the context of the Colombian census.

10.6% Black (includes Biracial) - Wrong term in the context of the Colombian census.

The mestizos are biracial. Mulattoes are biracial.

You don't should damage the correct information about the Colombian census.

--ControlCorV (talk) 00:28, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Controversial edits (2014–present)

Collebud88, I have just gone through "two years" worth of edits you have made to Wikipedia. While some were productive, the majority of them have been controversial and reverted by several editors of the community including myself as of late. A lot of these pages are often times neglected and are overlooked when minor edits are made and in this case they were made under the appearance it was being covered by the sources given, which you have done on many occasions. Example, adding "Sephardi" to sections where the sources covered "Berbers" only. This is a serious offense on Wikipedia and if it persists, I will not have a problem reporting this kind of behavior to the administrative panels, which may lead to a cease of editing privileges indefinitely. Not only is this type of behavior not tolerated, but it is also unfair to the editors who made a duly effort to source and add content under good faith. These types of edits on your behalf (even if thought to be of good faith, benefit of doubt usually given) undermines that good faith. Other edits of vandal-like behavior is your persisted clumping of census categories to fit this "universal-one" you are attempting to impose on these Latin American countries. These edits can be found here: Belize, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Cuba and others. Please refrain. Also, the term mulatto is not an archaic term in Haiti, Cuba and Colombia especially. In fact, it has a lot of cultural significance in its history and should not be disenfranchised and ignored especially when these countries use these terms in the languages of their censuses.

When making successful edits, please cite google books, JSTOR, news articles etc. from reputable sources like, "The New York Times," "El Diario." (for (in Spanish)) etc and be sure to add links, page numbers as well. Also, instead of removals, please "add" content, opposed to subtracting, especially when sourced or sources conflict with what you find. There is room for both, or if there is overwhelming numbers of sources to dispute another; although it could still be mentioned, but naturally will not be considered as strongly as before. If unsourced please add a citation needed tag ({ { cn } }). Thank you for your cooperation and happy editing. Savvyjack23 (talk) 04:47, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Collebud88. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Collebud88. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from History of the Jews in Colombia into Cali. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:02, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Collebud88. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Collebud88. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on United States; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Bettering the Wiki (talk) 09:28, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to United States, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Dhtwiki (talk) 00:04, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the image you're trying to add to United States: where is the evidence that the artist released those images into the public domain? And worse, why did you claim them as your own work? —C.Fred (talk) 02:32, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

if you're not willing to engage with the community we will simply have to block your account. I am a real person pls reply.--Moxy (talk) 04:14, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Collebud88 reported by User:Moxy (Result: ). Thank you. Moxy (talk) 04:23, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at United States

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Per a complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. When you find yourself disagreeing with others, you are expected to work towards agreement on the talk page, not just keep restoring the version that only you prefer. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 23:30, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited White Colombians, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cartagena (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:03, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from one or more pages into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 03:18, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 24

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to San Andrés and Providencia

Boundaries between the continents of Earth (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to San Andrés and Providencia

Insular region of Colombia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to San Andrés and Providencia

White Colombians (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Christian

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cuna Swastika flag moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Cuna Swastika flag, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please follow the prompts on the Articles for Creation template atop the page. ... discospinster _talk 14:39, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 31

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages San Andrés and Providencia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Fixed. Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:49, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war

Please stop what you're doing at Regional power and Colombia. If an edit you've made is reverted, and a discussion has started on the talk page, you must take part in that discussion if you really insist on your version. You can't just ignore it and keep reverting. If you continue like that, all you'll achieve is strain the patience of other editors and get yourself blocked.

Also, if you insert strong claims in an article, you must back them up by a source. And the claim must be explicitly made in that source. Thanks! – Uanfala (talk) 17:01, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. – Uanfala (talk) 20:19, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. – Uanfala (talk) 20:35, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for Edit Warring per report on AN3. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. regentspark (comment) 16:45, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Cuna Swastika flag concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Cuna Swastika flag, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:24, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Cuna Swastika flag

Hello, Collebud88. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Cuna Swastika flag".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:20, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Colombia; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.

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.

--JShark (talk) 02:33, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Collebud88 reported by User:JShark (Result: ). Thank you. --JShark (talk) 20:47, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at Colombia

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week 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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

The full report is at the noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 22:50, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:47, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regional power

Hi Collebud88! Regrettably, your most recent edit to regional power was reverted.

This isn't the first time you have removed Brazil from the article without providing any sort of explanation. Brazil has one the best sources among all the other countries, it has peer-reviewed scholarly articles specifically about Brazil as a regional power, so please refrain from removing sourced content. If your disruptive editing continues, this will be escalated to the administration. Thank you. SpaceEconomist192 ✐ 09:54, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. SpaceEconomist192 ✐ 23:01, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain namespaces ((Article)) for persistent, long term edit warring without engaging in discussion..

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Courcelles (talk) 13:34, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You’ve edited A user talk page, but never this one. Or any article talk pages. Not engaging in discussion is disruptive, so I’ve removed your ability to edit articles until you engage in discussion about your edits. Courcelles (talk) 13:40, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]