User talk:Truthiseveryminghnj

Welcome!

Hello, Truthiseveryminghnj, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Golo Mann. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! Hinmatóowyalahtqit (talk) 21:48, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

London Plan

I have reverted your edits as they are not in line with the latest version of the Plan. See the article's talk page. A P Monblat (talk) 22:05, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Shepherds Bush has been a metropolitan centre since at least the 2011 plan (http://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/LP2011%20Annex%202.pdf). —Nelson Ricardo (talk) 01:16, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2015

Hello, I'm VeryCrocker. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to User talk:VeryCrocker because it did not appear constructive. 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! VeryCrocker (talk) 20:28, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with List of National Football League records (team). Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 20:29, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at User talk:VeryCrocker shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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 BRD 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 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. Primefac (talk) 20:35, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistent disruptive editing, as you did at User:Primefac. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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. Huon (talk) 20:53, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]