User talk:Hernando1620

Recent edits to Neurocrine Biosciences

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you removed some content from Neurocrine Biosciences without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please 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. Thank you! DemocraticLuntz (talk) 22:43, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2015

Hello, I'm Donner60. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one or more of your recent contributions to Neurocrine Biosciences because it appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 22:53, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Neurocrine Biosciences. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Whilst some of the facts might be true, the rest of the information that you are adding is purely promotional. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:03, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Neurocrine Biosciences. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:07, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at Neurocrine Biosciences, you may be blocked from editing. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:08, 4 May 2015 (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:Hernando1620 reported by User:Joseph2302 (Result: ). Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:10, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at Neurocrine Biosciences

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. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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.

The full report is at WP:AN3#User:Hernando1620 reported by User:Joseph2302 (Result: Blocked). Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 17:37, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]