User talk:Ashtrayheart17

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Oxford Union. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block.

It's unsourced and WP:POV Meters (talk) 00:17, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Oxford Union 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 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 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. Meters (talk) 00:19, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Donner60. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Oxford Union, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 02:51, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing in the article on Cristina Fernández de Kirchner to suggest that she had anything to do with the Oxford Union. If you add this material again, as an Administrator here I will block you. I suggest that you turn your interest in Wikipedia to other articles and make you edits productive. --Bduke (Discussion) 03:56, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Meters (talk) 05:36, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You've been blocked from editing for 36 hours due to violating the Three revert rule. Please be more careful in the future. El_C 07:19, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please also consult our policies on neutrality and reliable sources. El_C 07:24, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]