User talk:Broompower960

October 2013

Hello, I'm Kirachinmoku. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Brentwood, Essex, 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. KiraChinmoku 19:18, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Kingston upon Thames with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. KiraChinmoku 19:18, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Brentwood, Essex with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. KiraChinmoku 19:19, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

This is your last warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Brentwood, Essex. KiraChinmoku 19:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

3RR / Vandalism

As you've already been reported for persistant vandalism and editwarring there is little point making a note on ANI. You are constantly adding dubious information and passing it off as fact without any form of citation. And given your edit history I have no reason to think for even a second that it might be true. KiraChinmoku 19:29, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring, as you did at Brentwood, Essex. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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.   Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:30, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm DVdm. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Lithuania, 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. DVdm (talk) 21:01, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Poland with this edit, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. DVdm (talk) 21:05, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to History of baseball in the United States with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. DVdm (talk) 21:06, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

This is your last warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Minnesota. DVdm (talk) 21:09, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Please note that obviously frivolous AFDs such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minnesota are considered vandalism. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 21:21, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Materialscientist (talk) 21:23, 15 October 2013 (UTC)