User talk:X11311y

Welcome!

Hi X11311y! I noticed your contributions 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

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Russ Woodroofe (talk) 07:50, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Edit warring

Your recent editing history at Riemann hypothesis 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 07:50, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

As editors have explained via edit summary to you, we need a reliable source for any claims in an article. A publication in a predatory journal does not suffice. Please discuss on the talk page if you think you can make a case for a reliable source. If you mash the revert button again, it is likely to result in a block for WP:3RR. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 08:19, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

It's here in Volume 19 but it doesn't give the full proof, only a summary. As I've said, preprint proofs of Riemann are ten a penny on the internet. This online journal doesn't look like it would come anywhere near qualifying as a reliable source, and external refereeing is needed.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:23, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

• Instead of getting blocked for breaking WP:3RR, please open a thread at Talk:Riemann hypothesis.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:38, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:X11311y reported by User:Russ Woodroofe (Result: ). Thank you. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 09:55, 9 May 2022 (UTC)