User talk:Allergy Spray

May 2022

Hello, I'm Spf121188. I noticed that you recently removed content from Xavier Rudd without adequately 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; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your 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. SPF121188 ^{(talk this way)} ^(contribs) 14:35, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Xavier Rudd, 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 your sandbox for that. Thank you. SPF121188 ^{(talk this way)} ^(contribs) 15:12, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Xavier Rudd, you may be blocked from editing. You need to stop removing references from this article, and adding original research. SPF121188 ^{(talk this way)} ^(contribs) 15:25, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As a side note, there was nothing defamatory about the information you removed, as it was properly cited. SPF121188 ^{(talk this way)} ^(contribs) 15:26, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits to Xavier Rudd could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. SPF121188 ^{(talk this way)} ^(contribs) 15:33, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Xavier Rudd 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. SPF121188 ^{(talk this way)} ^(contribs) 15:50, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]