User talk:TheEarthisCool123

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello, TheEarthisCool123, and welcome to Wikipedia!

An edit that you recently made seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox.

Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Magnolia677 (talk) 10:22, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Hello, I'm Squared.Circle.Boxing. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, KSI (entertainer), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. – ².O.^Boxing 15:55, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Nick Diaz, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. S0091 (talk) 13:58, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What do mean ReLiaBle SouRce every body in the mma community knows nick diaz is one if the greatest of all time TheEarthisCool123 (talk) 01:58, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Idgaf TheEarthisCool123 (talk) 01:58, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Islam; 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. – ².O.^Boxing 02:35, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok sorry but its the shahada also why r u following me on wikipedia lmao TheEarthisCool123 (talk) 11:13, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Ninja (gamer), you may be blocked from editing. Hakken (talk) 10:20, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

idc TheEarthisCool123 (talk) 12:03, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. S0091 (talk) 14:08, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A summary of some important site policies and guidelines you may find useful

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. All we do here is cite, summarize, and paraphrase professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources, without addition, nor commentary.
"Truth" is not the only criteria for inclusion, verifiability is also required.
We do not publish original thought nor original research. We cannot combine two sources to arrive at a statement not explicitly supported by either source.
Reliable sources typically include: articles from mainstream magazines or newspapers (particularly scholarly journals), or books by recognized authors (basically, books by respected publishers). Online versions of these are usually accepted, provided they're held to the same standards. User generated sources (like Wikipedia) are to be avoided. Self-published sources should be avoided except for information by and about the subject that is not self-serving (for example, citing a company's website to establish something like year of establishment).
Articles are to be written from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia is not concerned with facts or opinions, it just summarizes reliable sources. Real scholarship actually does not say what understanding of the world is "true," but only with what there is evidence for. In the case of science, this evidence must ultimately start with physical evidence. In the case of religion, this means only reporting what has been written and not taking any stance on doctrine.
Material must be proportionate to what is found in the source cited. If a source makes a small claim and presents two larger counter claims, the material it supports should present one claim and two counter claims instead of presenting the one claim as extremely large while excluding or downplaying the counter claims.
Don't edit war. Except in cases of clear-cut vandalism, do not revert changes to a page more than 3 times within a 24 hour period.
"Assume good faith" is a foundational site policy.

Ian.thomson (talk) 23:11, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

👏 YOU 👏 NEED 👏 A 👏 SOURCE 👏 THAT 👏 MENTIONS 👏 CHRISTIANITY! 👏

Your recent editing history at Christianity and Islam 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. Ian.thomson (talk) 07:17, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, given your history of failure to adequately pay attention to feedback, you're not looking at a mere report but an indefinite block for inability to work with the community. Ian.thomson (talk) 07:17, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

October 2020

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Khabib Nurmagomedov, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please read this.https://www.ufc.com/rankings. Thanks NEDOCHAN (talk) 17:16, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 16:43, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at YouTube, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Barkeep49 (talk) 16:44, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

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 ~~~~}}.