User talk:Cropi9

September 2019

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Biedermeier, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Lurking shadow (talk) 13:57, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, I have not. Read the article.

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Biedermeier. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. LakesideMiners^{My Talk Page} 16:17, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions. One of your recent contributions to Biedermeier has been reverted or removed, because it contains speculative or unconfirmed information about a future event. Please only add material about future events if it is verifiable, based on a reliable source. LakesideMiners^{My Talk Page} 16:22, 13 September

It does not, 20th century has already happened

Your recent contributions appear to show that you are engaged in edit warring; 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 override another editor's contributions. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle. 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. Lurking shadow (talk) 17:17, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cropi9, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Cropi9! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Masumrezarock100 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:05, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

March 2020

Hello, I'm Martin Urbanec. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Modernism—because it 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. Thanks. Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:03, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You should revert your revert, it' paragraph without references and section is tagged. Thank you Cropi9 (talk) 19:14, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]