User talk:140.192.75.182

October 2018

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Shimer College 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: Shimer College was changed by 140.192.75.182 (u) (t) ANN scored at 1 on 2018-10-19T16:23:16+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 16:23, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

November 2018

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Emmett Tyrrell. Your edits appear to be 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. LakesideMiners^{My Talk Page} 19:41, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

October 2019

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Angel Moroni, 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. Dorsetonian (talk) 19:49, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Your recent editing history 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Dorsetonian (talk) 19:49, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Angel Moroni, you may be blocked from editing. Dorsetonian (talk) 19:50, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Emmett Tyrrell. Dorsetonian (talk) 19:50, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring.

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 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 ~~~~}}.  Widr (talk) 20:02, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Other editors are the offending 'edit warriors.' This editor was asked to cite its source for the edit and did so during the last two revisions. The origin hypothesis has been correctly cited and linked. Please stop deleting the edit. However, the logged-in 'edit warriors' continue to remove the valid addition to the article.

Decline reason:

I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you at this time. You have not adequately addressed the reason for your block.

Please see our policy on edit warring. In the event of a content dispute, editors are required to stop reverting, discuss, and seek consensus among editors on the relevant talk page. If discussions reach an impasse, editors can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution.

Points to ponder:

Edit warring is wrong even if one is right.

Any arguments in favor of one's preferred version should be made on the relevant talk page and not in an unblock appeal.

Calling attention to the faults of others is never a successful strategy; one must address one's own behavior.

To be unblocked, you must affirm an understanding of all of this, and what not to do, and what to do when in a content dispute. Please tell us, in your own words, what it all means. Thanks,, Also, your edit was unsourced. "All content must be cited from reliable sources that are unconnected with the subject and have a reputation for fact checking." And as you appear to be insulting an entire religion, WP:BLP applies-- unsourced, negative uncited material may not be put back in once challenged and removed.-- Deepfriedokra 20:27, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

---

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.

December 2019

Hello, I'm CLCStudent. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Tim Blake Nelson have been undone because they 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 help desk. Thanks. CLCStudent (talk) 18:01, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

---