User talk:BryceHarper34

Londinium

I have reverted your edit to this article, as you removed an apparently reliable source and replaced it with unsourced text that contradicted what the source said. Whenever you add content to Wikipedia it should be supported by reference to a reliable source, and you cannot remove sourced content simply because you do not like what it says. Below this message I've placed a welcome template which has useful links that give more information about how to edit constructively on Wikipedia.

If you feel that the BBC article is inappropriate as a source or that there is a better source that contradicts it please open a discussion at the talk page, rather than repeatedly making this change without explanation. Thanks! Wham2001 (talk) 14:22, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Wham2001 (talk) 14:24, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

Your recent editing history at Londinum 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. Doug Weller talk 17:37, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BryceHarper34, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi BryceHarper34! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

I've moved the discussion

To Talk:Londinium#Demographics - should we rely on Tacitus for a statement on demographics?. Note that the link is to a BBC news report, not a tv channel, and that you misunderstand the word theory. You don't seem to have read the news article. It's about hard facts. Doug Weller talk 06:16, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is an inconclusive investigation. And that famous hard facts that you reference, which states that the discovery of 2 bodies should be taken as a good basis to indicate that these two ethnic groups were there from the beginning. What a joke. Then under that logic If we find bones with Eskimo characteristics in the Congo we must establish that the Congo was ethnically diverse from the beginning Because of 2 bodies?

November 2018

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 Londinium, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. ---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:12, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear (talk) If you were able to give a reason with fundamentals and objectivity, to defend the inclusion of the link to the BBC investigation, I will stop removing it. Otherwise it just seems that you want to keep it for mere whim.

May 2019

Hello, I'm Tarl N.. Your recent edit to the page Julian Edelman appears to have added incorrect information, so it has been removed for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. 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. Thank you. Tarl N. (discuss) 16:04, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Wallyfromdilbert (talk) 00:27, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did with this edit to Paul Joseph Watson. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 19:40, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Michelle Obama. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 19:41, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for violations of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy. 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 ~~~~}}. Bishonen | talk 19:49, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits to Michelle Obama and Paul Joseph Watson are completely unacceptable. Bishonen | talk 19:51, 6 May 2019 (UTC).[reply]

Discretionary sanctions for biographical articles

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. Bishonen | talk 19:54, 6 May 2019 (UTC).[reply]

May 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}. Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:48, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]