Hello Springing Up, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Regarding your recent reversion of my edit to the article, Tile, I think you will find that both Wikipedia and Britannica use a hyphen in "non-aligned". See Non-Aligned Movement and Encyclopedia Britannica: Non-Aligned Movement. Wiktionary says,

The prefix non- may be joined to a word by means of a hyphen, which is standard in British usage. In many cases, especially in American usage, non- is joined without a hyphen. (For example, nonbaseball is relatively common, but noncricket — referring to a primarily British sport — is rare.) Some non- words rarely or never use a hyphen (such as nonentity). By contrast, un- is almost always spelled without a hyphen.

It's thus a matter of style, not a rule, whether to write "nonrepeating" or "non-repeating". The latter seems better to me, the former to you. If I were British, I would stand on British usage, per the Wiktionary article, but as I'm not, rather than edit-warring, I'll let it pass. J. D. Crutchfield |  Talk 21:09, 20 April 2015 (UTC) reply

Oh, I didn't know that. But as for here, I guess what matters most in that kind of situation is if most of the article was written in the form of English from its original country (British) or if it was written in a US-Americanized form. But in Tile I can't tell. If you find signs of that article's having been written mostly in British English than the US version, then go ahead and revert my nonhypehenated edition of "nonrepeating" back to "non-repeating."

Springing Up ( talk) 21:20, 20 April 2015 (UTC) reply

.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at 14th Dalai Lama. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• 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, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Montanabw ^(talk) 17:56, 23 April 2015 (UTC) reply

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. 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 first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{ 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.

The full report is at WP:AN3#User:Springing Up reported by User:Skyerise (Result: Blocked). Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 20:09, 23 April 2015 (UTC) reply