User talk:80.4.136.59

May 2017

Your recent editing history 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.
Multiple articles are relevant to this. Your contributions show an additional history of constant reverting. Cosmic Clone (talk) 17:25, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

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:80.4.136.59 reported by User:Cosmic Clone (Result: ). Thank you. Cosmic Clone (talk) 17:32, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. 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.  Alexf^(talk) 18:01, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

June 2017

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Lughaya, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 08:01, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

Your recent editing history 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. O1lI0 (talk) 13:03, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. O1lI0 (talk) 13:05, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Demographics

Listen I was simply responding to gadabursi trolls who try to edit Jabril Abokor related stuff and I simply responded and we all know there are moer Jabril Abokor in Awdal than gadabursi in Awdal. But one thing, let's stop this edit war because I know 5 Jabril Abokor editors who are willing to edit every gadabursi related stuff and JBize it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Habar Awal king (talk • contribs) 14:15, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you purposefully and blatantly harass a fellow Wikipedian again, as you did at Gabiley, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Prinsipe Ybarro ^{(Talk to me)} 13:11, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Lughaya. - Arjayay (talk) 07:53, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

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

{{

Hello, I'm What cat?. I noticed that you recently removed content from Dilla without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. – 🐱? (talk) ^{(ping me!)} 15:21, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

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

---