User talk:Teuth444

July 2016

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Ramil Sheriff with this edit, without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:46, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Ramil Sheriff with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:49, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop put thinks on ramil sheriff page I am deleting all the things that are not true. We would respect if you stop reading untrue info on the internet and adding them to Wikipedia ramil does not play for the Belguim team nor did he play at cockfosters or harrow or northwood or harringey stop believe what you read in the internet. If you continue to put things that are not true I will report Wikipedia

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Ramil Sheriff with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:08, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring, as you did at Ramil Sheriff. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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. Huon (talk) 01:13, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you find yourself in a content dispute, you should discuss the issue with the other editors instead of reverting over and over. In particular, if you say sources that can be presumed to generally be reliable, such as Soccerway, are wrong, and that clubs like KVW Zaventem are faking their own player list, you'll need to provide some evidence for those claims. Huon (talk) 01:26, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

At a closer look I'll turn this into an indefinite block. It's obvious that you are User:Yo1234000 evading a previous block. That's not acceptable. If you think you were blocked in error, you should log into your previous account and dispute that block, not create a new account to continue the same behaviour that saw you blocked the first time. Huon (talk) 01:31, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]