User talk:Equwal

June 2019

Hello, I'm LauritzT. Your recent edit(s) to the page Max Truex 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. — Lauritz Thomsen (talk) 05:45, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I got that info from talking with his brother who still lives Equwal (talk) 15:51, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 2024

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Tamazgha. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Skitash (talk) 17:17, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

reverted Equwal (talk) 20:26, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Tamazgha 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; read about 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. Skitash (talk) 20:34, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Tamazgha. Skitash (talk) 22:52, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I always filled out the edit summary Equwal (talk) 23:02, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]