User talk:86.188.201.211

October 2013

Hello, I'm O.Koslowski. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to UR-144, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. O.Koslowski (talk) 15:51, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at UR-144 with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. O.Koslowski (talk) 15:53, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one of your recent edits to The Mascara Story 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: The Mascara Story was changed by 86.188.201.211 (u) (t) ANN scored at 1 on 2013-11-21T16:26:03+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 16:26, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Administrators noticeboard notified of your disruptive edits o High King of Ireland

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

April 2014

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on High King of Ireland. 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, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. 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. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:34, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

You are both in violation of WP:3RR. Dougweller (talk) 12:26, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Derry/Londonderry

Please have a look through Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Ireland-related articles and especially the section WP:DERRY before making any more edits relating to the names Derry/Londonderry. Thanks! -- John of Reading (talk) 15:04, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

All of this IPs edits this year have now been reverted for violation of the above standard. The reason used for some edits is also quite silly if I'm being frank. Mabuska ^(talk) 22:08, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Your reasoning is faulty: "Calling edits "silly" without supporting evidence is unhelpful and childish. Derry is used universally when referring to GAA teams. Previous changes are disruptive and made by someone with no understanding of GAA culture and sport". Your edit-warring behaviour is unhelpful and childish.

The use of County Londonderry and Northern Ireland is in regards to the geopolitical place the club is situated. If you don't like that well I'm sorry but the name of the county and country that Slaughtneill and all those other teams are in is County Londonderry, Northern Ireland. The fact the GAA use Derry is already covered for in the lede and article. Like what does the second sentence in the article say? It says "The club is a member of the Derry GAA". So yes your reasoning is quite silly and it is plain to see why you are making the changes you are despite the fact they run contrary to the community accepted and adopted WP:IMOS.

Also your claim "Previous changes are disruptive and made by someone with no understanding of GAA culture and sport." is a presumption that is highly inaccurate with no basis. I know quite a bit about GAA culture and sport.

As a sign of good-faith I will notify you of the Troubles WP:1RR restriction which affects matters like the Londonderry~Derry and Northern Ireland~Ireland issue. It states:

• All articles related to The Troubles, defined as: any article that could be reasonably construed as being related to The Troubles, Irish nationalism, and British nationalism in relation to Ireland falls under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per 24 hour period). When in doubt, assume it is related.
• Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Reverts of edits made by anonymous IP editors that are not vandalism are exempt from 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring.
• Editors who violate this 1RR restriction may be blocked without warning by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

Your reverts can be interpreted as vandalism as they violate Wikipedia practice and IMOS (which you have already been made aware of), and as the issue is subject to the above 1RR restriction, please abide by it. I would suggest that you take the issue to talk but your edits won't be accepted as it flouts the standard MOS and IMOS. Mabuska ^(talk) 11:48, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

March 2015

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. Mabuska ^(talk) 22:09, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

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

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. WP:DERRY and WP:IRE-IRL are very specific about the edits you have carried out. Editing multiple articles against consensus will get you blocked. Stop and discuss here WT:IMOS Murry1975 (talk) 22:42, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

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

AN/I for breach of 1RR in regards to Troubles Restrictions

Please see here and give an explanation or defence for your willful violation of 1RR despite being notified of it only a few hours beforehand. Mabuska ^(talk) 16:05, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Your revert campaign about Derry on Gaelic athletic club articles

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 days for Disruptive editing. 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 adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Since March 4 you have made numerous reverts on the use of Derry vs Londonderry on articles about Gaelic athletic clubs (GAC). This behavior continued in spite of numerous warnings. These articles are covered by the WP:TROUBLES Arbcom decision, of which I'm leaving a separate notice. That decision provides a WP:1RR restriction. You already violated that today at Slaughtneil GAC. EdJohnston (talk) 16:54, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

The naming of Derry is covered by discretionary sanctions under the WP:TROUBLES Arbcom case

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding The Troubles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

EdJohnston (talk) 17:01, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

June 2015

Hello, I'm Gilliam. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to List of IARC Group 2B carcinogens 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. – Gilliam (talk) 05:06, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

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

July 2015

Hello, I'm ScrapIronIV. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Electromagnetic compatibility without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. 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. Scr★pIron^IV 14:42, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

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

January 2016

Hello, I'm FoCuSandLeArN. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Plantation of Ulster has been undone 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. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 12:15, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

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

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Plantations of Ireland. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Scr★pIron^IV 16:17, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

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

---