User talk:Sekhu Atum-Re

January 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Dwight York, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by ClueBot NG.

Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Dwight York was changed by Sekhu Atum-Re (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.961791 on 2011-01-11T22:37:58+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 22:38, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Dwight York. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:02, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Nuwaubianism. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:04, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning; the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Nuwaubianism, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Corvus cornix_talk 23:08, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Dwight York. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful, then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. 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. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --Opus 113 (talk) 23:15, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning; the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at User talk:Boing! said Zebedee, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. See WP:AGF and stop accusing people who disagree with your edits of being liars -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:21, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism, such as on the page Dwight York. 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. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 23:24, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]