User talk:ThunderHobo

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for contributing edits that were made in good faith, but have been deemed not to contribute positively to the article. These edits have thus been reverted. Wikipedia's page on unacceptable additions may explain why. If you'd like to experiment with the syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.

Some good links for newcomers are:

Help contents – the main help page.
Quick guide – a "cheatsheet" listing the main editing commands.
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to create your first article
Tutorial
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and a timestamp. If you need help, check out the Teahouse, ask the Help Desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Once again, welcome! Schazjmd (talk) 22:03, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Schazjmd (talk) 22:03, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

October 2021

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Here I Go Again. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges on that page. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:54, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Here I Go Again. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:58, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell do Hobo's have to do with this song ? - FlightTime (open channel) 22:02, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are repeatedly reverting a factual edit to the page specifically cited as appearance in pop culture, and you don't even know what hobos have to do with the song? It's literally the chorus and already referenced on the page. Stop trying to keep the hobo down! ThunderHobo (talk) 22:10, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Hobo. - FlightTime (open channel) 02:05, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Chris Rabb, you may be blocked from editing. JesseRafe (talk) 15:28, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are the one who continues to revert to a version of the article that has nothing to do with the well-cited sources. Leave it alone. What is properly published is neutral. It is not your job to "interpret" it and present your opinion. ThunderHobo (talk) 16:01, 6 October 2021 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:ThunderHobo reported by User:Schazjmd (Result: ). Thank you. Schazjmd (talk) 22:22, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Telling that you have nothing better to do than argue about something as trivial as a valid reference to a song in popular culture. Because you don't think something is notable doesn't mean it isn't valid or of interest to the audience that would be looking for information on the song in the first place. ThunderHobo (talk) 22:27, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]