User talk:SalomoneBiblico

June 2022

Hello, I'm LizardJr8. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Garbatella—because it 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 or the Help desk. Thanks. LizardJr8 (talk) 21:30, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia as you did at Garbatella. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Alex2006 (talk) 11:32, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No wait, vandalism, it's the other way, I corrected what was vandalism. SalomoneBiblico (talk) 11:34, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Garbatella, you may be blocked from editing. Alex2006 (talk) 11:41, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kidding? English garden movement? It's real estate advertising, it is never called an "English garden movement" style before the crisis. SalomoneBiblico (talk) 11:46, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Garbatella. Alex2006 (talk) 12:00, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Garbatella

"I live in Garbatella", means nothing here. Wikipedia uses reliable sources, and this is reliable. If you remove sourced content according to your feelings, this is considered vandalism here. Moreover, I don't think that you know all the sources about the quarter. If you don't agree, please open a thread on the talk page of the article, thanks. Alex2006 (talk) 11:42, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is not sufficient. Read Wikipedia rules and you will see reliability goes along with consensus and secondary sources. SalomoneBiblico (talk) 11:48, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been reported to an administrator. Alex2006 (talk) 12:00, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Page block

You have been blocked indefinitely from Garbatella for persistent disruptive editing despite warnings, with violations of the biography policy [1] (with also a completely unacceptable edit summary) and removal of well-sourced and relevant content,[2] (giving an absurd reason, "I never heard anything like borrowing from an "English garden movement" in my life, in preference to clicking on the link to Garden city movement.. !). Note that you can still edit Talk:Garbatella to discuss changes you want to make to the article. You can request unblock by placing {{unblock|your reason here}} on this page. Bishonen | tålk 16:16, 1 July 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Kill yourself idiots, I know you very well buying and selling. SalomoneBiblico (talk) 18:01, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}. Doug Weller talk 18:37, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

(block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

Bishonen | tålk 19:09, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]