User talk:Sambapop11

April 2023

Hello, I'm Wesoree. I noticed that in this edit to Average human height by country, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. 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. -- Wesoree ^{(talk·contribs)} 15:33, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Hello, I'm Hey man im josh. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Charithra Chandran—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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:29, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Battle of the Hydaspes, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article.
Please note Kreately is not a reliable source - Arjayay (talk) 09:39, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Violence against women has an edit summary that appears to be inadequate, inaccurate, or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Please do not use vague summaries for controversial changes or removals like "removing false information" or "correcting false information". Thank you. StephenMacky1 (talk) 21:32, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Kal Penn, 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. ULPS (talk) 01:20, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral point of view

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:13, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV includes removing information that might be considered negative about a country. Please make sure that Wikipedia articles reflect what reliable sources say about a topic, not what you wish to be true. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:14, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Demographics of Gibraltar, you may be blocked from editing. MrOllie (talk) 12:41, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Bamboo ceiling 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. Sundayclose (talk) 20:03, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Don't remove reliable sources about people's identities

Your edit on the pages of Parvesh Cheena and your edits on the page of Tan France here and here have been reversed. You commented that "source is not credible, information removed" on the Cheena page, which is false. A recent discussion on the reliable sources noticeboard, one use said "whether afterelton.com is generally reliable, it is certainly reliable". And in a previous discussion it was stated that "AfterElton appears to be a property of Viacom, a publisher with a reputation for accuracy and fact checking". As for the edit on the Tan France website, I'm not sure about Hornet, but I see no issue with the article in HuffPost for Tamal Ray, nor with the the articles in Attitude, Gay Times, or The Tribune India, as they give the appropriate context on that page for the statement "Being of Pakistani descent, he is one of the first openly gay South Asian men on a major show". So, please don't make edits like that in the future. Historyday01 (talk) 15:51, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023

Please stop. 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 Indian Americans, you may be blocked from editing. MrOllie (talk) 15:24, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. MrOllie (talk) 15:34, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. SpaceExplorer12 (talk) 17:31, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 days to prevent further vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Alexf^(talk) 17:39, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Body mass index, 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. Ertal72 (talk) 22:17, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2024

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at Edison, New Jersey, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. This is your final warning..... Alansohn (talk) 16:31, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive removal of content apparently motivated by your personal opinion.

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 ~~~~}}. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:27, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]