User talk:SShreddies

July 2024

Your recent editing history at 2026 FIFA World Cup 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. Sounder Bruce 19:29, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Huw Edwards, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Dank Jae 19:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to 2026 FIFA World Cup

Hello. In a recent edit to the page 2026 FIFA World Cup, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the first author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. In the case of international soccer tournaments like the World Cup, there is an established consensus to use American English, including the name "soccer" and the singular form for national soccer teams, in articles about tournaments staged in, or primarily in, the United States. Your claims of "consistency" with other World Cup articles therefore fall flat because the issue is not one of "consistency" with a different form of English that is not used in the article in question. 1995hoo (talk) 19:31, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

Your recent editing history at Huw Edwards 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. DeCausa (talk) 19:57, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's nonsense to say that the incident that ended Huw Edwards' career is irrelevant. This was widely reported by all major news sources.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 20:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My edit summary is valid

I'm changing the main image to something more modern, on Palace of Westminster 5.70.188.253 (talk) 20:36, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:StarryNightSky11 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/StarryNightSky11. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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 ~~~~}}. Spicy (talk) 21:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]