User talk:SuperSuperSonic207

Welcome!

Hi SuperSuperSonic207! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Hy Brasil (talk) 17:51, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please, slow down

As you've probably noticed, most of your edits are being reverted. I strongly urge you to take a moment to check out the guidelines that have been presented to you, at the top of your talk page. I believe you want to help out, but Wikipedia takes some time getting used to and doesn't function like any regular website. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 19:58, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but what are you talking about? Me fixing articles you think its not worth? SuperSuperSonic207 (talk) 23:23, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 2023

Hi SuperSuperSonic207! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Cocaine Bear several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Cocaine Bear, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 21:29, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Along Came Polly. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although 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. Continuing the disruption of twice-blocked Special:Contributions/2601:196:4A01:D770:0:0:0:0/64. Binksternet (talk) 17:21, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You were blocked twice as Special:Contributions/2601:196:4A01:D770:0:0:0:0/64 and then you registered a username, returning to the same articles that you had previously edited. (Example 1,[1][2] Example 2[3][4]) Doing that is a violation of WP:MULTIPLE and can get you blocked hard. Binksternet (talk) 17:25, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This makes a lot more sense now. They need a rangeblock. Mike Allen 21:22, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. GraziePrego (talk) 02:18, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Grazie. Im sorry for causing edit war. Im just sick of having to deal you reverting my edits all because of that stupid "known professionally as" term. And you then you blocked me. Im just gonna say this. You think "known professionally as" flows better. But sometimes it doesn't mean it needs to be said on every articles. Sometimes i hate when you that. You might be asking what's wrong with "known professionally as"?. The thing is that if feels like every articles on rappers feels the same. I'll ask why don't you like and what's wrong with "better known by his/her stage name" and it's nothing wrong with that. You just act like that term is not allowed when it doesn't say that and that's not what Wikipedia would say and you don't even own those pages. On the top of that, when you we're "known professionally as" flows better than "better known by his/her stage name", uses less words and a more professional tone. Where did you even hear that from? You just make that excuse for the sake of reverting my edits. You, Binksternet, MikeAllen and some others do the same thing to me and I'm sick of that. And now you got me blocked because of this. SuperSuperSonic207 (talk) 20:00, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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 review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Daniel Case (talk) 05:59, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but you guys should know that duplication on the On the Floor article with the term "American rapper" doesn't need to said twice that's all. You can't do that. Leave it where it is. Okay? Not every page needs duplication. That's all i was trying to help you that's all. SuperSuperSonic207 (talk) 03:12, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

C)