User talk:Nfomamdoalfrlpsa

January 2014

Your recent editing history at Arms industry shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 03:10, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Arms industry, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 03:11, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

you are currently engaged in an edit war!! not me!!--Nfomamdoalfrlpsa (talk) 21:48, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

World's largest arms importers

1 India 2 Australia 3 South Korea 4 Singapore 5 United States 6 Saudi Arabia 7 Greece 8 China 9 United Arab Emirates 10 Pakistan 11 Turkey 12 Malaysia 13 Norway 14 Indonesia

source you release is deceitful source i have talked about this --Nfomamdoalfrlpsa (talk) 21:47, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please show me where you "talked about this" and what did you say? I cannot find any evidence of you "talking about it". Thank you. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 23:38, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia--Nfomamdoalfrlpsa (talk) 22:13, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Arms industry, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 23:23, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at List of former sovereign states shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 23:35, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

stop

This is your last warning. why Rv m contributions!!!!!!--Nfomamdoalfrlpsa (talk) 05:25, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your irritation or you will be going to be report as a SPAM and blocked from editing--Nfomamdoalfrlpsa (talk) 05:26, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

source you release is false and delusive information stop Rv m contributions!!!!!! you may wish using dispute resolution stop edit waring!!

you are currently engaged in an edit war!! not me!! This is your last warningstop your irritation stop --Nfomamdoalfrlpsa (talk) 05:29, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. stop your irritation or you will be going to blocked--Nfomamdoalfrlpsa (talk) 06:43, 24 January 2014 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Nfomamdoalfrlpsa reported by User:Dr.K. (Result: ). Thank you. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 06:53, 24 January 2014 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Nfomamdoalfrlpsa reported by User:Dr.K. (Result: ). Thank you. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 08:51, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 09:01, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a short time for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule. 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 would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Kuru (talk) 16:02, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Jim1138. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Arms industry 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! Jim1138 (talk) 07:43, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Where have you talked about the Arms Industry

Please point me to your discussion. I cannot find it. Thank-you Bevo74 (talk) 08:11, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

World's largest arms importers

1 India 2 Australia 3 South Korea 4 Singapore 5 United States 6 Saudi Arabia 7 Greece 8 China 9 United Arab Emirates 10 Pakistan 11 Turkey 12 Malaysia 13 Norway 14 Indonesia

source you release is deceitful source i have talked about this

The reference doesn't provide sources or evidence to substantiate its claims and is also riddled with inaccuracies and contradictions. If you would like to release source or evidence to substantiate its claims please do--Nfomamdoalfrlpsa (talk) 07:47, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your assertion is vague and unsubstantiated. Jim1138 (talk) 07:53, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

it was not supported by any solid source--Nfomamdoalfrlpsa (talk) 07:55, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Again vague. No claim of any substance. Jim1138 (talk) 08:04, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

checked the article source its clearly misleading information cited from a reference riddled with contradictions and flaws.

It is sourced, I've seen lots of sources I don't like, I can't just ignore them. The only 'discussion' I can see is your list of countries with no source at all'. Bevo74 (talk) 08:18, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

the article source is clearly misleading information cited from a reference riddled with contradictions and flaws.--Nfomamdoalfrlpsa (talk) 08:21, 31 January 2014 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Nfomamdoalfrlpsa reported by User:Dr.K. (Result: ). Thank you. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 07:45, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Nfomamdoalfrlpsa (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

block with no reason Nfomamdoalfrlpsa (talk) 8:18 am, Today (UTC+0)

Decline reason:

The reasons for the block are explained below. Yunshui 雲‍水 08:42, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

January 2014

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule. 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 would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Since you have resumed the same exact edit warring coming off your block, I have blocked you again. If you resume the edit warring after this block expires, I can all but assure you that the next block will be indefinite. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 08:19, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. 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.

Your personal attacks have just earned you an indefinite block. If you keep it up, I will revoke your talk page access. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 08:30, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-appeals-enlists.wikimedia.org. Gogo Dodo (talk) 08:32, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]