User talk:Seabourn101

Welcome!

Hi Seabourn101! I noticed your contributions to Developed country and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Toast (talk) 13:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List in Island country

I noticed that you removed the list in Island country on the basis of "his full section is a repeititive info when there is already a full list of island countries existed, lack of necessity". I just wanted to draw your attention to the differences between the lists and make sure that it was your intention that this different presentation be lost. The list in List of island countries is organised by country or territory, and is in a sortable table. The list in Island country was organised by the physical islands and their location in the world. So example the Chagos Archipelago (the physical entity) is listed in Island country, but no directly comparable entry is found in List of island countries, the closest is British Indian Ocean Territory (the territory). Jameel the Saluki (talk) 14:33, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The section was a waste of space and deviated from the main topic, which was simply some random selection of island group or archipelego have nothing to do with "island nation", can you give me a reason to convince me some listing subjects such as Malay Archipelago or British Isles is worth adding or anything to do with the topic of "island country"? "Island country" suppose to be focused on a political entity concept, not a geographical one. Seabourn101 (talk) 14:40, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not trying to convince you of anything. I just wanted to make sure you were aware that there were differences between the lists. Jameel the Saluki (talk) 14:50, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Your recent editing history at Taiwan 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. Qiushufang (talk) 01:50, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Don't get blocked before you make your point on the talk page

An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period. An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes or manually reverses other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert. Violations of this rule often attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Fourth reverts just outside the 24-hour period will usually also be considered edit-warring, especially if repeated or combined with other edit-warring behavior.

` Moxy- 03:28, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:LVTW2 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LVTW2. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Spicy (talk) 15:31, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]