User talk:Mr. Master of Editor

Hello. I had written my sentences thoroughly and with required information too. Please rewrite your own sentences in Navdeep Saini because it is too short and also contains 1-2 grammatical errors, such as "in" Sydney Cricket Ground instead of "at" and "claimed his wicket of" instead of "claimed the wicket of". I believe my sentences were thoroughly correct,and seemed to provide better information than yours. However, your editing contained correct information except the grammatical errors and shortening of facts, so I will be kind enough to keep your edit as it is, while adding just a sentence more, to add information. Thank you very much and I respect your enthusiasm for editing Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bonk Mot (talk • contribs) 07:27, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Hello, I'm Fuzheado. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Mushfiqur Rahim—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. Fuzheado | Talk 15:17, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Moises Henriques, you may be blocked from editing. bonadea contributions talk 06:53, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I added correct information. What is the problem? Mr. Master of Editor (talk) 08:55, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is the fact that there is no source for the information you added here. However, there is a source which supports the old information (this source, which you see in the footnote in the article). I don't doubt that your new information is correct, but you have to update the source in the article when you update the information. There's a couple of links on this page to information about how to do that, and here is a good practical guide as well, which also explains why this is important. Thanks! --bonadea contributions talk 09:20, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. Can you give me few tips on how can I become a good editor? I will try to provide sources. But where shod I provide sources? Please do tell me. Mr. Master of Editor (talk) 09:23, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You give them in the article, usually right after the piece of information you are adding. The guide I linked above is pretty specific about where you should put the source, and how you should write it (and also what kind of source is OK to use.) --bonadea contributions talk 10:08, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. Thanks for telling and teaching me. Mr. Master of Editor (talk) 11:03, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding trivia to articles that are simply not important. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:07, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jersey number is important as well. It is not any small source. Don't you even not understand that anyone can take actions against you if you delete sources like these? Sorry but I will continue to add important sources like this. Mr. Master of Editor (talk) 10:36, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What source? There is no source in this edit, and the jersey number does not seem to be mentioned in the source given in the infobox. But even if there is a source, you must not simply add the information back, when it has been contested. That is edit warring (please read that page carefully, and pay special attention to this section). Use the article talk page to discuss the question instead. Thank you. --bonadea contributions talk 10:45, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stop giving threats. What is your problem? Can't you say it politely that I should provide source? I will provide source but you guys are amazing. Yesterday, I added jersey number with perfect source but somekne deleted it. So I also give you a warning. Don't delete information with accurate sources. Mr. Master of Editor (talk) 11:21, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I count four different posts by three different editors on this user talk page letting you know that you should provide sources for your edits. My post was not a threat, it was very important information that you are in danger of violating a Wikipedia policy that you might not have been aware of. It would not have been fair to you to allow you to think that it is acceptable to keep reverting multiple times! Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 11:46, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And just so it's clear: you should not restore the jersey information with a source. Other editors have contested the addition of that information (regardless of whether it is sourced) and so you need to take it to the article talk page, as explained on the policy page about edit warring. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 11:48, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So how can I provide jersey number? I didn't understand what you tell me to do. I know I keep reverting but you need to tell me how can I provide sources like jersey number? Mr. Master of Editor (talk) 12:03, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

By "take it to the article talk page" what I meant was that you should go to the article talk page and ask there why the jersey number is not considered to be important or relevant. Unless you get other editors to agree that the information should be there, you should not add it in the article. Not even with a source. --bonadea contributions talk 13:44, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. But why did you delete the jersey number? I want to know what is the reason? Why don't you agree with the jersey number? Give reasons please. Mr. Master of Editor (talk) 14:05, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That should be obvious if you have read the information about edit warring that I asked you to read carefully. It would not be appropriate to leave unsourced, contested information that has been added through edit warring in the article. If you want to provide sources and arguments in favour of including that information in the article, do so on the article talk page. I won't respond further. --bonadea contributions talk 16:52, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why won't you respond? You were the one to start the conversation. Mr. Master of Editor (talk) 13:06, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Mohammad Amir. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. bonadea contributions talk 19:16, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What? I don’t know what you are talking about Mr. Master of Editor (talk) 04:24, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Mohammad Amir. If you do not understand why it is completely unacceptable to claim that someone has mental health issues when the source quotes them as saying that their boss has subjected them to mental torture, or if you think that it is then fine to state in Wikipedia's voice "he quit due to mental torture", you should not edit English Wikipedia. Not having command of the language is not a crime, but if your command is so shaky that you don't understand the sources you read or the conversation above, it will make it impossible to edit constructively. bonadea contributions talk 08:46, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Paper9oll. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Mushfiqur Rahim have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. – Paper9oll (📣 • 📝) 05:58, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Mushfiqur Rahim, you may be blocked from editing. Reason – Please stop adding Mr Dependable' – Paper9oll (📣 • 📝) 06:08, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Joshua Da Silva. Reason – Wikipedia:Fancruft – Paper9oll (📣 • 📝) 06:18, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Master of Editor, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Mr. Master of Editor! 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 MrClog (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did with this edit to Mushfiqur Rahim. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 17:12, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Mark Steketee; 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.

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:54, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite block

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing. I'm sorry, but competence is required on Wikipedia. You have been failing so much on that front, you have become a considerable drain on volunteer resources.

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 ~~~~}}.

El_C 15:42, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]