User talk:Carizona

June 2019

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to El Assico has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: El Assico was changed by Carizona (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.987474 on 2019-06-05T03:48:52+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 03:48, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Ostealthy (talk) 04:36, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Ostealthy (talk) 05:03, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Ostealthy (talk) 05:40, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Carizona, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Carizona! 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 Rosiestep (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

El Assico

Carizona,

Let me make clear to you that the intention of the "El Assico" redirect is not to mock either of the teams involved. It has been my experience that both fanbases in this rivalry have embraced the term. I think both sides realize that the game tends to bring out the worst in either team, and the game has been a sloppy one filled with turnovers and punts in most recent match-ups.

This is why the name has caught on, and why several third-party publications have used the term, and why the redirect is helpful to Wikipedia users. The purpose is not to denigrate either team or their fanbases. In fact you are the only person I've ever encountered that is so offended by it. Ostealthy (talk) 21:02, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]