User talk:Sternayuhu

October 2023

Hello, I'm AntiDionysius. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to LGBT rights in Saudi Arabia 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 or the Help desk. Removal of well-cited material requires stronger justification than an editor asserting it's not true; it may be best to discuss the issue on the article's talk page first. Thank you. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:00, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at LGBT rights in Saudi Arabia, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Kline • talk to me! • contribs 22:12, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at LGBT rights in Saudi Arabia, you may be blocked from editing. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:15, 9 October 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. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:50, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at LGBT rights in Saudi Arabia. GoldMiner24 ^Talk 23:15, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit

I removed irrelevant to the page or incorrect information. Sternayuhu (talk) 22:06, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I explained above, if you're removing information that is well-cited, you need to do more than simply saying "it's wrong". You need to show evidence to back up your argument that the sources supporting the text are incorrect. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:14, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit

I already explained it, how you automated? Sternayuhu (talk) 22:15, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained to you twice now that asserting that cited information is wrong is not sufficient. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:18, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So what explanation do you want? Sternayuhu (talk) 22:20, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If information is cited, you need to provide a source for it being incorrect. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:21, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Where do provide the source? When it’s removing information. Sternayuhu (talk) 22:23, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I explained above, the talk page of the article would be a good place to deal with such things. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:30, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT rights in Saudi Arabia

Do not remove cited content without a proper reason. Just because you think it's inaccurate is not a proper reason. You need reliable sources that rebut what you are claiming to be inaccurate. ... discospinster _talk 23:30, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. GeneralNotability (talk) 00:16, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]