User talk:Leo.Mathematics

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Leo.Mathematics, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 00:33, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020[edit]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 01:03, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Gamma function 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. Kinu ^t/_c 01:24, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:Gamma function for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. - DVdm (talk) 09:15, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, as you did at Talk:Gamma function, you may be blocked from editing. - DVdm (talk) 15:29, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use talk pages for inappropriate discussions, as you did at Gamma function. - DVdm (talk) 09:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Kinu ^t/_c 20:41, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Funding of Wikipedia may drop significantly, if it does NOT publish accurate or useful information. This is independent of the source of information. Maybe you are tested as well.

--Leo.Mathematics (talk) 22:03, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and that's why Wikipedia doesn't allow original research. Your failure to get the point is independent of whatever donations this site may or may not get. --Kinu ^t/_c 22:05, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you are not able or willing to check basic formulas, than you cannot provide accurate information or educational material.

If you fail to understand recommendations on talk pages (which are not the published content), then editors are out of touch with the educational process, which damages greatly the educational and pedagogic value of the content.

--Leo.Mathematics (talk) 22:09, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]