User talk:Captain Timebomb

Welcome!

Hello, Captain Timebomb, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 19:09, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 22:54, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Logan Paul, 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. Wavemaster⁴⁴⁷_{(Need help? Ask me)} 02:20, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Logan Paul 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. 331dot (talk) 03:08, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like a reliable source. I suggest that you discuss this on the article's talk page and see what consensus can be reached. Meters (talk) 07:46, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, his supposed support appears to be just a publicity stunt for his mockumentary. Removed it again, but as the warning says, continuing to undo edits without explaining is not a good idea. Meters (talk) 07:57, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]