|
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Diego Costa, did not appear constructive and has 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 the 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. JMHamo ( talk) 16:20, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
When adding links to material on external sites, as you did to
Pep Guardiola, please ensure that the external site is not
violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as
YouTube or
Sci-Hub, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be
blocked from editing. See
Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information.
If you believe the linked site is not violating copyright with respect to the material, then you should do one of the following:
If the material is available on a different site that satisfies one of the above conditions, link to that site instead. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 14:40, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi, what does ref 1 represent? I'm not a Spanish speaker I'm afraid. Kosack ( talk) 10:48, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Carles Pérez 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Reaper Eternal ( talk) 00:04, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
Leaving this message on both of y'all's talk pages, and pinging just to be extra sure you both get the message:
@ Fcbjuvenil and HSV1887: Sort the issue out on the relevant articles' talk pages by citing professionally published mainstream sources. Stop saying "vandalism," neither of you is using that term correctly. Remember that both of you are trying you help, even if you disagree on how that should look. This is not some game where you can win by getting more points, so stop taking that approach.
@
Fcbjuvenil:
Your statement You are German, I am Spanish. You do not know the rule of Spain.
is the sort of bigotry we don't allow here. If anyone cites sources about a Spanish team and a Spaniard doesn't cite sources, then the person who cites sources is right as far as we're concerned. If I continue to see any bigoted comments, (@
HSV1887:
or future accusations of bigotry without evidence), someone might get blocked for violating our
civility policies.
@ HSV1887: You clearly know how to use talk pages, and yet I'm seeing no talk page discussion from you for the past month. Be a good example to a newer user. Ian.thomson ( talk) 00:14, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
if I see you reverting them again anywhere without starting a talk page discussion to examine the sources, I'm going to block you for edit warring.That's exactly what is going to happen, just in case the warnings below aren't clear enough to any of the participants of this ridiculous edit war. ST47 ( talk) 21:44, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Template:FC Barcelona squad; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can 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 you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. ST47 ( talk) 02:31, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at FC Barcelona. Stop edit warring, seek consensus, final warning. ST47 ( talk) 16:55, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
@ ST47 and Ian.thomson: He did it again without discussion just after his ban [2] [3]. -- HSV1887 ( talk) 10:30, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
|
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Diego Costa, did not appear constructive and has 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 the 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. JMHamo ( talk) 16:20, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
When adding links to material on external sites, as you did to
Pep Guardiola, please ensure that the external site is not
violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as
YouTube or
Sci-Hub, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be
blocked from editing. See
Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information.
If you believe the linked site is not violating copyright with respect to the material, then you should do one of the following:
If the material is available on a different site that satisfies one of the above conditions, link to that site instead. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 14:40, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi, what does ref 1 represent? I'm not a Spanish speaker I'm afraid. Kosack ( talk) 10:48, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Carles Pérez 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Reaper Eternal ( talk) 00:04, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
Leaving this message on both of y'all's talk pages, and pinging just to be extra sure you both get the message:
@ Fcbjuvenil and HSV1887: Sort the issue out on the relevant articles' talk pages by citing professionally published mainstream sources. Stop saying "vandalism," neither of you is using that term correctly. Remember that both of you are trying you help, even if you disagree on how that should look. This is not some game where you can win by getting more points, so stop taking that approach.
@
Fcbjuvenil:
Your statement You are German, I am Spanish. You do not know the rule of Spain.
is the sort of bigotry we don't allow here. If anyone cites sources about a Spanish team and a Spaniard doesn't cite sources, then the person who cites sources is right as far as we're concerned. If I continue to see any bigoted comments, (@
HSV1887:
or future accusations of bigotry without evidence), someone might get blocked for violating our
civility policies.
@ HSV1887: You clearly know how to use talk pages, and yet I'm seeing no talk page discussion from you for the past month. Be a good example to a newer user. Ian.thomson ( talk) 00:14, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
if I see you reverting them again anywhere without starting a talk page discussion to examine the sources, I'm going to block you for edit warring.That's exactly what is going to happen, just in case the warnings below aren't clear enough to any of the participants of this ridiculous edit war. ST47 ( talk) 21:44, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Template:FC Barcelona squad; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can 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 you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. ST47 ( talk) 02:31, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at FC Barcelona. Stop edit warring, seek consensus, final warning. ST47 ( talk) 16:55, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
@ ST47 and Ian.thomson: He did it again without discussion just after his ban [2] [3]. -- HSV1887 ( talk) 10:30, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)