User talk:Pego19826

March 2016

Hello, I'm NottNott. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Frank Nunley— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. NottNott talk|contrib 18:52, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

Hello, I'm Bonadea. I noticed that you recently removed content from Prophet 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. bonadea contributions talk 18:55, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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, as you did at Prophet, you may be blocked from editing.

Please have a look at the FAQ located inside the yellow box at the top of Talk:Muhammad. The reason why images of Prophet Muhammad are allowed at Wikipedia is explained there.

You should also read this information. Repeatedly reverting other editors' edits may lead to a block. bonadea contributions talk 19:12, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Prophet. See WP:NOTCENSORED Kleuske (talk) 19:15, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Prophet 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. —mikemoral (talk) 19:21, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Prophet. 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 ~~~~}}. clpo13_(talk) 19:24, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]