User talk:Pendseaadi

August 2019

Hello, I'm Yamla. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, IOS 10, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Yamla (talk) 10:34, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not one of your edits was correctly sourced. This is your responsibility; see WP:RS and WP:CITE. Several of your edits were outright vandalism. Please note that you may be blocked immediately if we see this happen again, even once more. --Yamla (talk) 10:37, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020

Please do not add or change content, as you did at iPhone SE (2020), 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. —Locke Cole • t • c 19:59, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at iPhone 11, you may be blocked from editing. —Locke Cole • t • c 20:01, 4 April 2020 (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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. —Locke Cole • t • c 20:01, 4 April 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 iPhone 11. —Locke Cole • t • c 20:13, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting sourced material

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, you may be blocked from editing. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:15, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:18, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.

OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:23, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ban appeal

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).

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

Request reason:

The edit was properly sourced, and 13 is NOT a preadolescent, it is an adolescent. Pre-adolescents are 10-12. 13 is a teenager.

Decline reason:

Per below. — Daniel Case (talk) 05:12, 15 October 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.

. Pendseaadi (talk) 19:28, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What is your source? PhilKnight (talk) 20:42, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.books.9781615370979.kg07 Pendseaadi (talk) 22:02, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That source simply says that between 10 and 12, children enter prepubertal development. Furthermore, the article already notes that there are different definitions of the age range; you're previous edits were simply removing other references and unilaterally declaring your own range without a source. If you continue to edit like that when this block expires, you will be blocked again for a longer duration. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:13, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Mason Ramsey. 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. ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 17:53, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]