User talk:DeeHistorian

Hello, DeeHistorian, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! FDW777 (talk) 07:35, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Directories and indexes Department directory
Editing articles
Developing an article Simplified Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse The Help Desk, for more advanced questions Help pages Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

== November 2021 ==. This is becoming rather tedious please refer to Joseph stalins page showing his place of birth and death it explains historical fact his place of birth as Georgia but then Russian empire, this is no different at the time of Harry Fergusons birth the entirety of Ireland was part of the United Kingdom and the British empire, later on the partitioning of Ireland the Republic of Ireland left the UK, this is a matter of historical fact not an opinion, is Wikipedia a place of fact or opinion fdw777 seems to dislike actual fact and is threatening all sorts as they seek to cleanse historical fact Please stop deleting historical fact because you don't like it Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Harry Ferguson. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you.

Specifically MOS:IMOS BIOPLACE. FDW777 (talk) 07:36, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at Harry Ferguson, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason.

Once again I direct you to MOS:IMOS BIOPLACE. FDW777 (talk) 22:00, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make disruptive edits to Wikipedia contrary to the Manual of Style, as you did at Harry Ferguson. FDW777 (talk) 09:36, 7 November 2021 (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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. FDW777 (talk) 09:36, 7 November 2021 (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. FDW777 (talk) 10:54, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Harry Ferguson, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Stroness (talk) 11:34, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Harry Ferguson. Stroness (talk) 11:40, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at Harry Ferguson

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 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 ~~~~}}.

The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. EdJohnston (talk) 16:10, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

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. DuncanHill (talk) 22:10, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

November 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for edit warring, as you did at Harry Ferguson.

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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 23:17, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

DeeHistorian (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

this is not warring on my part and my editing is not controversial it is a matter of historical fact at the time of Harry Fergusons birth the entirety of Ireland was part of the United Kingdom on the partitioning of Ireland Northern Ireland was created and remained part of the United Kingdom, giving clarification of historical fact is not controversial trying to delete and hide historical fact is neither Wikipedia right or private individual editors, I contend its the editors deleting facts that are being disruptive and controversial,deleting opinions is one thing deleting historical fact because you don't like it is completely another,I do not understand how a matter of historical fact needs a discussion but the deletion of said fact doesn't

Decline reason:

Clear case of edit warring. It doesn't matter that you think you are right, both sides in an edit war think they are correct. You have to establish a consensus for your changes and you failed to do so, instead relying on edit warring. Yamla (talk) 13:56, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.