User talk:Jackalacktic

January 2022

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Robson Green have 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: Robson Green was changed by Jackalacktic (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.891726 on 2022-01-08T20:09:12+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 20:09, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm DarkGlow. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to List of former Emmerdale characters have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. – DarkGlow • 21:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 2022

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Atlantic cod. 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 your sandbox. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 00:51, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Atlantic cod, you may be blocked from editing. IUCN still show the Atlantic cod at least concern.[1] If there has been a reassessment, you must provide a source. —C.Fred (talk) 00:59, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Again, if there's been a reassessment in 2021, please provide a link so we can verify it. —C.Fred (talk) 03:07, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Especially since I just checked the IUCN's list of updates [2] and did not find any cod listed. —C.Fred (talk) 03:11, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Atlantic cod. —C.Fred (talk) 00:24, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. 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 ~~~~}}. —C.Fred (talk) 12:51, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Philipnelson99. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Atlantic cod, 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. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Philipnelson99 (talk) 22:56, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Atlantic cod 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. MrOllie (talk) 01:41, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]