User talk:Gaius Khufus Caesar

User:Eternal Space illustrations replacing existing images

Hello, I'd like to direct you to this talk page exchange on the topic of using User:Eternal Space's works instead of Jeff Dahl's. Star11308 (talk) 20:39, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Crown (heraldry), without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 01:51, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did not add fake crowns they arel sourced taken directaly from the svg versions of the coats of arms used in different kingdoms, a lot of people use that page so stop deleting it entirely Gaius Khufus Caesar (talk) 01:53, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care if they're fake or not: I didn't say anything about it. This stuff is trivial and, worse, totally unverified. You should know that, as a Wikipedia editor. Drmies (talk) 01:54, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

most of these pictures have very good sources taken directaly from government websites, you have no good reason to delete this page so stop it, also since when trivial is a reason for deletion there is literally a page called toilet paper orientation Gaius Khufus Caesar (talk) 01:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Crown (heraldry). First of all, this is unverified trivial. Second, you should at least have the decency of explaining why you are reverting this. Drmies (talk) 01:53, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

you are the one obliterating a page that has existed for years, dont delete the page for no reason Gaius Khufus Caesar (talk) 01:54, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention. There IS a reason: it's unverified. How is that not clear to you? Drmies (talk) 01:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

look at the above comment if anyone is vandalizing wikipedia it's you Gaius Khufus Caesar (talk) 01:59, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, clearly you don't understand vandalism: read WP:VANDAL. I'm not even accusing you of vandalism. And TPO is a well-verified article. Do you understand that we require secondary sources here? WP:RS? Drmies (talk) 02:00, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you are acusing me of vandalism see the first comment above sayin I may be blocked, the main reason the page heraldic crowns exists is for people to see the gallery, countless youtube videos have used these drawings as they are good representations of the crowns used in history or in State heraldry, i have a proposal a new page exclusive as a gallery of these crowns to be created Gaius Khufus Caesar (talk) 02:04, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I actually don't see any sources in any of your edits. Drmies (talk) 02:01, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Go to the page in every Kingdom, that i have added the crown and you see they are cropped directaly from the coat of arms Gaius Khufus Caesar (talk) 02:05, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not going through your edits to see where you cropped the images from: this is ridiculous. Also, you are the one who is disrupting the project (by inserting unverified content and edit warring over it) and I will report you. Drmies (talk) 16:02, 16 January 2024 (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; read about 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. PhilKnight (talk) 17:05, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Look Dearest i'm restoring the page to what it WAS BEFORE THE VANDALISM it has suffered some guy arbritraly decided to exclude the gallery because he didn't like it for no good reason instead of notifying me how about you go and lock the page Gaius Khufus Caesar (talk) 20:13, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You were clearly Edit Warring which is not allowded. Untamed1910 (talk) 20:35, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 7 days 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 review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. PhilKnight (talk) 20:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]