User talk:RayanHetti

June 2020

Hello, I'm Dan arndt. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Geoffrey Bawa have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Dan arndt (talk) 08:06, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Geoffrey Bawa. 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. Dan arndt (talk) 23:51, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Geoffrey Bawa, you may be blocked from editing. Dan arndt (talk) 09:06, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Geoffrey Bawa. Dan arndt (talk) 09:08, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Geoffrey Bawa 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. Dan arndt (talk) 00:02, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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) 02:45, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Geoffrey Bawa: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Dan arndt (talk) 04:59, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Geoffrey Bawa; 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. Dan arndt (talk) 10:19, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Geoffrey Bawa#Citations for early life section and engage in the discussion there. Your concerns raise a bigger question about that section, and we need to have a discussion among editors to determine what the best thing to do with that section is. —C.Fred (talk) 17:14, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]