User talk:Shamrock2020

January 2021

Hello, I'm The Banner. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Shannon Airport have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. The Banner talk 18:21, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EireAviation. The Banner talk 12:17, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

October 2021

Welcome to Wikipedia. Editors are expected to treat each other with respect and civility. On this encyclopedia project, editors assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Here is Wikipedia's welcome page, and it is hoped that you will assume the good faith of other editors and continue to help us improve Wikipedia! See [1]. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:21, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 2021

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed maintenance templates from Dublin Airport. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Please see Help:Maintenance template removal for further information on when maintenance templates should or should not be removed. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. The Banner talk 00:02, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Dublin Airport 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Andrewgprout (talk) 00:11, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Dublin Airport, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. The Banner talk 00:23, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BURDEN is clear who is responsible for referencing.

You say in an edit summary "Why your fear to follow the links and search the flights in the airlines booking engine and find that they are indeed bookable and the information is accurate. You and Andrewgprout's constant vandalism is the reason why this page was blocked for so long. Your odd obsession needs to stop"

Because it is not up to anyone other than you to find and apply sensible references that directly support the detail you are adding. The references you are adding and supporting do not do this. The detail is marginal at best so there is no requirement that such detail is included here - This is an encyclopaedia not a directory. I fail to see why you and your puppets can not see that. As for why the page was previously blocked it is clear that this was because of you and your puppets continual deletions of valid templates not any other edits. Look at your own behaviour before you accuse others. Andrewgprout (talk) 00:24, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you learning nothing from the history of your previous edits and the messages on your talk page by others including @Andrewpgrout? An airline's website main page is not a valid reference for a series of flights. You need to provide specific reliable and verifiable evidence. --10mmsocket (talk) 21:44, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2022

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Dublin Airport, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. The Banner talk 23:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Dublin Airport. 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. The Banner talk 16:07, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Dublin Airport 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Why are you so afraid for independent sources that you prefer to edit war about it? The Banner talk 17:44, 28 February 2022 (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:Shamrock2020 reported by User:10mmsocket (Result: ). Thank you. 10mmsocket (talk) 18:16, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Shamrock2020. You've been warned for edit warring per a complaint at the noticeboard. You may be blocked if you revert the article again without getting a prior consensus for your change on the article talk page. I have noticed per WP:AIRPORT that there are sometimes disagreements on what is an adequate source for flight service. You need to work this out with others. EdJohnston (talk) 16:48, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dublin Airport & Aeroflot

The sources make it loud and clear that de flight are suspended, not stopped. And it was not singly Aeroflots decision to do that but International Sanctions.

Please stop the edit warring and removal of sourced information. Note the earlier warning above about edit warring. The Banner talk 08:29, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022

Hello, I'm Fragrant Peony. I noticed that you recently removed content from Dublin Airport without adequately 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; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your 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. Fragrant Peony (talk) 01:26, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Flightradar

Look on Flightradar 24 they are using 16/34 as we speak. Trainsspotter4life (talk) 22:13, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this! Shamrock2020 (talk) 22:18, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed maintenance templates from Dublin Airport. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Please see Help:Maintenance template removal for further information on when maintenance templates should or should not be removed. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. The Banner talk 15:38, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022

Hello, I'm The Banner. Your recent edit(s) to the page Dublin Airport appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been reverted for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. 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. The Banner talk 13:52, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Doesn't require referencing"

Please read WP:V this is a core value of Wikipedia and is not negotiable. Writing things in edit summaries like "Doesn't require referencing" is not something you can do. Maungapohatu (talk) 17:04, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have reverted my edit. Please do not do that. It is your responsibility to provide a reference to this information before it can be readded that is clear in WP:V I mentioned above. Doing so again would not be a very good idea. Thanks Maungapohatu (talk) 22:01, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history 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; read about 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:46, 9 February 2023 (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. Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:50, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Dublin Airport. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 00:52, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing to edit war after a block will never end well

The solution is simple - find a reference - or leave the detail out. Maungapohatu (talk) 00:25, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring, as you did at Dublin Airport. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 00:44, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for edit warring, as you did at Dublin Airport.

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 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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 01:39, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]