User talk:Alizabeth blon

Please stop adding the names of Dugard’s daughters without discussing it on the talk page. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 02:14, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

dugard daughter[edit]

fist of all they add her first daughter angel name and starlet was her second daughter she doesn't even go by anymore i know her real name Alizabeth blon (talk) 04:08, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Again, please stop adding the names without discussing it on the talk page. You know the edit is disputed and you have reverted multiple times without discussion. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 03:36, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 2019[edit]

Hello, I'm Wtmitchell. I noticed that in this edit to Kidnapping of Jaycee Dugard, 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. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 13:17, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jaycee Dugard article[edit]

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.—Chowbok ☠ 14:48, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

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:Alizabeth_blon reported by User:MPS1992 (Result: ). Thank you. MPS1992 (talk) 23:45, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 2019[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

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, as you did at Kidnapping of Jaycee Dugard, you may be blocked from editing. Schazjmd (talk) 23:52, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring, as you did at Kidnapping of Jaycee Dugard. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. ST47 (talk) 00:07, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is consensus not to add the names of the daughters to the Jaycee Dugard article, which could constitute a violation of the Biography of Living Persons policy. Do not add this material again without discussing it on the article’s talk page. You have already been blocked from editing for adding this material. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 01:13, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Kidnapping of Jaycee Dugard. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 09:55, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Kidnapping of Jaycee Dugard, you may be blocked from editing. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 00:37, 31 July 2019

I removed the warning because I see you didn’t actually list the daughter in your last edit. However, the punctuation change you made isn’t correct and turns it into a run on sentence, so I left the revert in place. If you want to make changes regarding adding names, please discuss it on the talk page of the article. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 13:25, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 2019[edit]

I am reverting your edits as vandalism, which, based upon refusal to discuss, and repeated edits without any summary explaining them, and inclusion of gross grammatical problems, they meet the criteria at this point. Please stop. Anastrophe (talk) 19:39, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 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 ~~~~}}. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:43, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Kidnapping of Jaycee Dugard. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 11:15, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Back to the same pattern right after block expired, instead of discussing your proposed changes in the talk page as requested. I am blocking the account for a few more days, for you to reconsider. Be aware that failure to abide and discuss, will lead to increasing length of blocks up to possibly indefinite length. -- Alexf^(talk) 16:27, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing 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 ~~~~}}. Alexf^(talk) 16:25, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Stop your disruptive editing at Kidnapping of Jaycee Dugard. You have already been blocked three times for making the same edits without discussing it on the article talk page. The next time could result in a longer or indefinite block. Your edit is grammatically incorrect. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 18:17, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Administrators’ noticeboard discussion[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 12:30, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 2019[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}. Doug Weller talk 15:40, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]