Hello, I'm Mlpearc Phone. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Demi Moore, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Please note that the verifiability policy mandates that unsourced material that has been challenged, such as by a "fact" tag, or by its removal, may not be added back without a reliable, published source being cited for the content, using an inline citation. The cited source must clearly support the material as presented in the article, and the burden is on the person wishing to keep in the disputed material. So if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so, following these requirements! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mlpearc Phone ( open channel) 22:49, 23 January 2017 (UTC) reply

I understand you are very new to Wikipedia. There are reasons your edits at Demi Moore weren't appropriate, and that is why two editors have reverted you. The protocol now is to take your concerns to the article's talk page and try to reach consensus with other editors. I would gently note two things: The actress' name was an issue settled over great, long discussion and contention some time ago. This was the name, all three words, that were agreed upon. You probably weren't aware that changing it unilaterally without discussion was not appropriate. Also, WP:VERIFY requires that we cite our claims. I'm afraid eBay listings are not allowed as reference citations. But Wikipedia is a community, and if you go to the article's talk page, editors there will help you sort things out and try to find cites. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 01:25, 24 January 2017 (UTC) reply

I followed your advice and there is now a talk page discussion. My suggested edit covers three areas, the biggest of which is not about her name although I'd like to point out that the footnote only addresses contention regarding her first name, not her last name. Leighleey ( talk) 01:34, 24 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Hi Leighleey! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Missvain ( talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:06, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

You have been here only half a month, yet already you are making contentious, non-consensus edits. And what is worse, you are now edit-warring to do so. I've been collegial and patient at Talk:Demi Moore, yet if you're going to edit-war, that takes things to the next level, after which admin intervention will be called for. There are avenues you can pursue, such as Arbitration, Mediation, or a Request for Comment. So Wikipedia offers options when editors disagree. But edit-warring is not one of them. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 01:35, 10 February 2017 (UTC) reply

You're very close to requiring admin intervention. And I can tell you that an admin is not going to be amused by your mimicking my edit-summary. You've been here half a month; do you really want to have admin sanctions already? -- Tenebrae ( talk) 01:57, 10 February 2017 (UTC) reply

This is the required warning that one more revert by you at Demi Moore will result in a WP:3RR violation, for which an admin will block you from editing. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 02:17, 10 February 2017 (UTC) reply

Fine. You're being reported. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 02:19, 10 February 2017 (UTC) reply

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Demi Moore. 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 request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{ unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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.  — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 03:27, 10 February 2017 (UTC) reply

I'm sorry it came to this. I did note that this would happen.

As the notice above reads, "during a dispute, you should ... seek consensus". At Talk:Demi Moore, there was no consensus for your proposed edits. "If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution." I specifically linked to the venues regarding Mediation, Arbitration and Request for Comment. You did not avail yourself of those. I would ask you not to edit-war again, since sanctions increase. I would also offer that edit-warring soon after a block expires is not something admins want to see. I hope you choose one of the mediation venues. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 20:28, 10 February 2017 (UTC) reply