User talk:82.81.235.123

April 2019

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Missile guidance, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. BilCat (talk) 18:23, 8 April 2019 (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.

Your recent editing history at Ace Attorney 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 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 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.
The fact these indie games (which meet notability guidelines due to having stand alone pages) are influenced by AA sourced through secondary material is perfectly fine to include. It is sourced information from RSes, so removal of it repeated is unwarranted. Masem (t) 18:46, 10 April 2019 (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.

May 2019

Hello, I'm JackintheBox. I noticed that in this edit to Drifting (motorsport), you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. JACKINTHEBOX • ^TALK 05:15, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

June 2019

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Ant mill. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 08:48, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Neoteny images

Your attempts to remove various images from Neoteny in humans have been reverted multiple times by more than one editor (apparently). Please stop removing images and begin discussing the issue on the article's talk page if you have a problem with the existing images in that article. This is how the bold-revert-discuss cycle of editing is supposed to work. (Note: I do not wish to discuss this with you here on this talk page, so replying here is probably not going to be helpful. Please open a discussion on the talk page of the article.) - dcljr (talk) 01:37, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

---