User talk:TheTruthTeller4

November 2015

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to 2015 Minneapolis shooting has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: 2015 Minneapolis shooting was changed by TheTruthTeller4 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.967769 on 2015-11-27T09:16:42+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 09:16, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary 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. —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:24, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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 BRD 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 your 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. —Granger (talk · contribs) 20:57, 27 November 2015 (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. Thank you. —Granger (talk · contribs) 06:04, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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 change the meaning of a sentence that has a reference at the end of it, then you must change the reference or somehow note this. For instance, in this change, the reference at the top of the shooting section, where you inserted about the protesters also having ski masks, is not in the reference. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:20, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

April 2016

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at White people with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:04, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oshwah is being too lenient imho. Consider this your final warning. You appear to be WP:NOTHERE. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:01, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; thanks EvergreenFir! I've changed my warning to reflect the proper level that I feel is appropriate, and taking your final warning into account as well. I also have a suspicion that you, TheTruthTeller4, are not here to build an encyclopedia, but I'll yield in favor of assuming good faith and see. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:07, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further notice the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to White people. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 22:29, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Widr (talk) 22:32, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]