User talk:Rowlatt11

January 2023

Hi Rowlatt11! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. You did this at Portuguese Empire, Spanish Empire, and French colonial empire. TompaDompa (talk) 10:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

January 2023

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Portuguese Empire have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Portuguese Empire was changed by Rowlatt11 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.8661 on 2023-01-10T20:29:00+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 20:29, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Rowlatt11! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Portuguese Empire several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Portuguese Empire, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. TompaDompa (talk) 22:23, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Dewritech. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Julius Caesar, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Dewritech (talk) 20:41, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Rowlatt11! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Gunpowder empires‎‎ several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Gunpowder empires, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. NebY (talk) 12:08, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Maurya Empire. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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 noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 12:00, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I will report you the next time I catch you disrupting an article, this is too much. --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

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 noticeboards.
• 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 Chandragupta Maurya, you may be blocked from editing. HistoryofIran (talk) 16:00, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I have the sources but don't know how to add them Rowlatt11 (talk) 16:10, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

That's your problem, and still doesn't justify constantly altering/removing sourced information. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:13, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content.

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 ~~~~}}.  PhilKnight (talk) 16:23, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I have blocked you indefinitely, but this should not be understood as a permanent block. You need to learn how to add references, and commit to always adding them from now on. Once you have reached that stage, you can be unblocked. PhilKnight (talk) 16:23, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently been editing India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan which has been designated a contentious topic. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;

comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;

follow editorial and behavioural best practice;

comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and

refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

RegentsPark (comment) 15:39, 30 January 2023 (UTC)