User talk:WikiEditsAnnon

October 2017

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Panic! at the Disco, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 20:47, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Taking Back Sunday. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 00:38, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making disruptive edits, as you did at User:Bowling is life.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Binksternet (talk) 00:40, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 ~~~~}}. Spike Wilbury (talk) 16:46, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All Time Low discography

Hi. Please see WP:USCHARTS for why combining Bubbling Under peaks with 100 is not appropriate or entirely accurate. Also, we do not substitute a peak in a column with another chart from that country. Thank you. Ss 112 17:21, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017

Hello, I'm Serols. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to User:Walter_Görlitz— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the 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. Serols (talk) 16:09, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Twenty One Pilots. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:36, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I could tag you for claiming that the Twenty One Pilots page is yours, which is called WP:OWN. We don't own articles. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I stand corrected. You claimed that only the timeline was yours. My mistake. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:17, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Twenty One Pilots. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. SkyWarrior 16:48, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to User talk:Serols, you may be blocked from editing. Serols (talk) 16:55, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Twenty One Pilots. Serols (talk) 16:56, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:11, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

I was warned if I did another act of vandalism - A.K.A making a timeline for the pages - I would be blocked. I didn't do another act of vandalism, but was blocked. The only thing that could have happened was time lines still big there, but me not making new ones. Point is: I didn't do edits after my warning to be blocked, but got blocked anyway.

Decline reason:

In order for the block to be invalid, you need to show us you haven't been making disruptive edits. Ever. I took a look through your contributions. Your edits have very definitely been disruptive. Given your block history, you didn't need any further warnings here. Yamla (talk) 12:37, 13 December 2017 (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.

Unblock (additional information)

{unblock|reason=oh yeah. My last edit was at 16:47 but I got warning at 16:56 then got blocked for further vandalism. WikiEditsAnnon (talk) 07:34, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]