User talk:Dwest25

June 2015

Hello, I'm GB fan. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Aaron Hernandez, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. -- GB fan 21:18, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 2015

Hello, I'm DaHuzyBru. Your recent edit to the page David Lee (basketball) appears to have added premature information about a reported sports transaction, so I have removed it for now. The transaction is based on anonymous sources and/or awaiting an official announcement. If you believe the transaction has been completed, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. 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. DaHuzyBru (talk) 06:04, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 2015

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Caitlyn Jenner, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Inks.LWC (talk) 05:17, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

April 2016

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Aaron Hernandez. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 10:08, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Aaron Hernandez 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 article's 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. -- GB fan 10:42, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Aaron Hernandez. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 15:16, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Please take part in the discussion of Aaron Hernandez here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Aaron_Hernandez#Sexuality. Changes made to the article without seeking consensus or by removing reliable sources will be reported to WP:AN3 as edit warring. μηδείς (talk) 02:30, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reported?

Reported what? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:51, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It took you 2 years to respond, so I'm counting on hearing from you again in January of 2022. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:18, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reported again. Dwest25 (talk) 15:55, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, it's 2022 already? I must have overslept. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good one 🤡 Dwest25 (talk) 03:49, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Mr. Robot; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. -- /Alex/₂₁ 06:23, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2022

Hello, I'm Fiwec81618. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Benny Johnson (columnist), but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. 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! Fiwec81618 (talk) 00:57, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 2022

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.192.76.8.77 (talk) 12:23, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 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 ~~~~}}. Acroterion (talk) 16:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you return to violating Wikipedia policy on biographies of living persons after this block expires, the next block will be a lot longer, or indefinite. Acroterion (talk) 19:23, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently been editing post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated a contentious topic. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;

comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;

follow editorial and behavioural best practice;

comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and

refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:03, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tucker Carlson

Dwest25, please self revert your Tucker Carlson edit [1]. Per the contentious topics warning on the page, "You must follow the bold-revert-discuss cycle if your change is reverted. You may not reinstate your edit until you post a talk page message discussing your edit and have waited 24 hours from the time of this talk page message" There is a talk page discussion regarding the changes you made which was started in November of this year. You have not made the case for your addition on the talk page while you have restored it to the article page twice in violation of the warning above. Several editors have already reverted the change so this is clearly an area where you need to get consensus to restore. Springee (talk) 12:34, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

You have been blocked from editing from certain namespaces ((Article)) for a period of 24 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Doug Weller talk 09:08, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This[2] was the last straw. I also note your lack of responses to warnings. Doug Weller talk 09:09, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]