User talk:64.190.226.125

January 2021

Your recent editing history 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 17:42, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Big Three (tennis), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. You have been told to stop blanking the page and removing big four content. Other articles are linked to the big for content. The lead is one thing but the rest is not Fyunck(click) (talk) 17:22, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You may nor may not agree with my edits, but they are clearly constructive. They simplify the lede to match the title. The content removed is from a merge; one can't just merge two ledes together like this.

What you removed was not just the lead... whole sections of prose were decimated as if it never happened. And the lead is a merge of two articles. Sure it can be rewritten and shortened, but you pretty much simply cut out all reference to the Big Four and that shouldn't happen. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:06, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Big Three (tennis) 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 18:07, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Big Three (tennis), you may be blocked from editing. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:43, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:64.190.226.125 reported by User:Fyunck(click) (Result: ). You may be able to avoid problems by self-reverting asap. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:49, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

Your recent editing history at Big Three (tennis) 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 22:49, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at Big Three (tennis), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. You only just got off a block for the same thing! And you're back at it? Do you want to get blocked for a month or more? Please stop removing content. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:07, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at Big Three (tennis), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. If you boldly remove content and it gets reverted, you do not revert again. You bring it to talk to convince others that your edit is better. You don't seem to understand how wikipedia works. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:59, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Edit warring at Big Three (tennis)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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.

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 ~~~~}}.

Per a complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. EdJohnston (talk) 22:40, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@EdJohnston: You just come off a block for 3RR and removal of content and you go right back to it? Really. If you boldly remove content and that gets reverted, you don't remove it again. You bring it to talk to see if you can convince others that your edit is better. You've only been here since 12 January 2021 so maybe you don't understand how things work here. But after coming off a block I would think you would have skimmed through Wikipedia procedures and realize that you can't keep re-reverting when one of your edits is challenged. You seem to be so upset with a merge that you want to remove the merge completely and make it a deletion instead. Both Wjemather and myself have had to revert your recent removals and then you reverted me again. That would be here and also here. Please self revert your last revert before things get out of hand. I'm trying to help you understand the situation. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:14, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 64.190.226.125 (talk · contribs). You are blocked again, this time for a month. Any admin can lift this block if they become persuaded you will stop warring and follow our policies. See WP:GAB for how to be unblocked. EdJohnston (talk) 05:43, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.