User talk:88.106.1.223

Hi welcome to my user account

Welcome!

Hello! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. You are welcome to edit anonymously; however, creating an account is free and has several benefits (for example, the ability to create pages, upload media and edit without one's IP address being visible to the public).

Create an account

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Dede2008 (talk) 14:28, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

August 2021

Hello, I'm Necctaylor. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Louise, Princess Royal have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Necctaylor (chat) 16:32, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Per Template:Infobox royalty, the 'caption' parameter in the infobox is for details of the image. It is not useful to repeat the sitter's name or title -- it is already given above the image. Thanks. DrKay (talk) 17:49, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. I just asked you above to format image captions in the infobox per Template:Infobox royalty, but you carried on merely repeating the sitter's name and title,[1] which is not useful. It is already given in the 'name' parameter. I have corrected your edit,[2] but please format the caption per consensus in future. DrKay (talk) 18:00, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

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.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at Marie of Romania, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. I've warned you twice about captions, but you've just done exactly the same thing again[3]. It is disruptive to continue with edits after being asked to stop. DrKay (talk) 21:10, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

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 be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make disruptive edits to Wikipedia contrary to the Manual of Style, as you did at Marie of Romania. DrKay (talk) 21:12, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Marie of Romania 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.
You have performed 4 reverts in the last few hours at the article. You must therefore undo your last revert. DrKay (talk) 21:39, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

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 have re-edited Marie of Romania [4] but have chosen not to undo your fourth revert. You are therefore blocked. DrKay (talk) 21:50, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.  DrKay (talk) 21:50, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

I warned you several times about repeating names and titles in captions when there was already a caption on the infobox with the same information. However, immediately after coming off a block, you have continued with the exact same sequence of edits. You are therefore re-blocked. DrKay (talk) 17:02, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

---