User talk:OPP64

Welcome!

Hello, OPP64, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one of your contributions does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Questions page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Linguist111^talk 01:27, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Leave me alone, warning #1. OPP64 (talk) 00:06, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Hello, I'm Linguist111. I noticed that you recently removed content without adequately 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; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Linguist111^talk 01:31, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Linguist111^talk 01:33, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Death of Regan Russell, you may be blocked from editing. Matt Deres (talk) 01:38, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Death of Regan Russell. Matt Deres (talk) 01:41, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no denying that those reactions took place - why are you trying to remove that material? It is well cited. You are going to get yourself blocked for edit warring. Matt Deres (talk) 01:43, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Death of Regan Russell 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. Linguist111^talk 02:04, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User talk:Linguist111. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Name-calling will not get you anywhere. Linguist111^talk 16:37, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Trucker220, you may be blocked from editing. Linguist111^talk 16:56, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Trucker220, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Linguist111^talk 02:00, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not the same person as Trucker220. Check the IP#. You are attacking me for no reason. I suggest you educate yourself in cyber bullying laws in Canada. OPP64 (talk) 00:08, 27 December 2020 (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:OPP64 reported by User:Linguist111 (Result: ). Thank you. Linguist111^talk 02:10, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing 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 ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 16:58, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Generally it takes at minimum two people to make a war, You are not innocent in this matter OPP64 (talk) 00:09, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.

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 ~~~~}}. GirthSummit _(blether) 11:40, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, I interpret your comment above about the cyber bullying laws in Canada as a clear legal threat. If you wish to be unblocked, you will need to make an unblock request which includes an explicit statement to the effect that you have no intention of taking legal action. Best GirthSummit _(blether) 11:43, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]