User talk:Antwerpant

January 2022

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Economy of South Korea, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. You have repeatedly added the same unsourced content to this article despite a previous warning on User talk:183.98.152.118. Please provide sources or stop. Qiushufang (talk) 18:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bruh. These are facts that you can be confirmed by going into the documentation. Dont delete all i done. That is kind of stalking Antwerpant (talk) 22:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What documentation are you referring to? Your contributions here were to content that did not have a source previously and the content you added didn't provide a source either. Qiushufang (talk) 23:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Joseon, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Qiushufang (talk) 18:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fortunately, this source was very reliable. Looks like you didn't check the source Antwerpant (talk) 22:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at North Korea–Russia border. Qiushufang (talk) 18:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

Your recent editing history at Joseon 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. Qiushufang (talk) 23:21, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]