User talk:Emperortikacuti

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Emperortikacuti. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! bodnotbod (talk) 10:13, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013

Hello, I'm Binksternet. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Iran, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! 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. Binksternet (talk) 19:43, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Peru. 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. Yintan 19:44, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Errors on 12 July

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Peru–United States relations page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:28, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

November 2014

Hello, I'm I dream of horses. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Donetsk Republic (political party)— 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. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 06:13, 7 November 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Sorry about that. I made a mistake. --I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 06:15, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Islamist insurgency in Nigeria for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Islamist insurgency in Nigeria is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islamist insurgency in Nigeria until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. zzz (talk) 12:43, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Russian military intervention.

I would ask that you please stop and discuss the issue and not just ignore me. If its a matter of rows its already in a new row as it as. Please discuss what you problem is here. Breaking the line ruins the style of the infobox. EkoGraf (talk) 00:39, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Made a compromise edit. EkoGraf (talk) 00:50, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, four questions. First, what's the point of adding the break at the Russian military intervention infobox when the text is already in a new row? Second, what's the point of adding all the other breaks everywhere else? Third, why are you edit warring over this issue? And fourth, why are you ignoring me when I ask you about this in the edit summaries? EkoGraf (talk) 20:43, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 2015

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Second Battle of Tikrit (March 2015)‎. 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 that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount and can lead to a block, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. 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.
I'm tired of watching you edit war with @EkoGraf: over an HTML tag. Please discuss the matter with them or I'm going to have to file a report at WP:ANEW to solve things that way. Thanks. Dolescum (talk) 01:46, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

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. Thank you.Dolescum (talk) 16:22, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Failure to communicate

Hello Emperortikacuti. As it is evident that you're refusing to communicate with other members of the community, I've blocked you indefinitely. This is a collaberative project and if you're going to refuse to communicate then there's really no way to resolve disputes when they arise. Thus the only option is to prevent you from editing until you assure us you're going to be willing to communicate at least somewhat. Edit warring over changes you want to make is absolutely unacceptable, but it's even worse when there's a complete refusal to communicate to other human beings. You can use {{unblock}} if and when you're ready to have your block reviewed, but I'd advise you prepare a convincing reason. Swarm ^X 23:14, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]