User talk:TheUltimateWarrior1234

TheUltimateWarrior1234, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi TheUltimateWarrior1234! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cordless Larry (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

June 2016

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Timeline of the history of the region of Palestine has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Timeline of the history of the region of Palestine was changed by TheUltimateWarrior1234 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.882995 on 2016-06-26T00:28:18+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 00:28, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be undone.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Sro23 (talk) 00:29, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making disruptive edits.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Sro23 (talk) 00:34, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit reverts to A380

Dear Ultimate Warrior,
Thank you for your edits to Airbus A380. Unfortunately I had to roll back the five latest edits that you made for a number of reasons including:

The lead picture needs to be a definitive image and the one selcted has been chosen by consensus. Actually, we need no more images, we have too many as it is so unless there are existing ones that can be significantly improved, better just let it be.
The date 1 September is not necessarily true, the numbers are based on the Airbus O&D for the month preceding the September issue and there is no way of telling how many on a given day.
Links were added that required redirects.
A380 required redirect but link was also circular and referred back to the same page.

Regards
E x nihil ^(talk) 03:30, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to your comments on my Talk page with the following, which I have posted here for the record.

I gave my reasons for the revert in some detail on your Talk page because there just wan't room to do justice to five reverts on the page itself. I hope that you have read the reasons and can see that there were legitimate treason for each revert. IF you can address those reasons by all means fell free to contribute to the page.

It appears that others have done the same as I did anyway. Please take note of the general consensus emerging here and go with the flow, it's all much more fun and productive that way.E x nihil ^(talk) 10:12, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Your recent editing history at A380 shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 article's 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.Canterbury Tail talk 14:21, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]