User talk:Tregias003

October 2019

Hello, I'm Mattythewhite. I noticed that you recently removed content from Ole Gunnar Solskjær without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:37, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Serge Gnabry, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Kosack (talk) 11:52, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Lucas Hernandez. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:25, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Leon Trotsky. 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. 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.

This edit has been discussed before, and rejected. If you think it is appropriate, please start a discussion on the Talk page rather than repeatedly trying to force it through. RolandR (talk) 12:26, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 2019

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Declan Rice. Mattythewhite (talk) 13:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dan James

Hi, you're bordering on a block judging by your previous warnings above but I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. Please do not remove information from articles like you did at Daniel James (footballer) without explaining why. Thanks. Kosack (talk) 07:41, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2019

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Divock Origi. Kosack (talk) 14:50, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but your recent edits appear to be intentional disruptions designed to illustrate a point. Edits designed for the deliberate purpose of drawing opposition, including making edits you do not agree with or enforcing a rule in a generally unpopular way, are highly disruptive and can lead to a block or ban. If you feel that a policy is problematic, the policy's talk page is the proper place to raise your concerns. If you simply disagree with someone's actions in an article, discuss it on the article talk page or, if direct discussion fails, through dispute resolution. If consensus strongly disagrees with you even after you have made proper efforts, then respect the consensus, rather than trying to sway it with disruptive tactics. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 20:17, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Salma Hayek. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:18, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Ad Orientem (talk) 16:07, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

United States

Please cite your source for the changes you made to United States. The current source in the article doesn't support the claims you're making for various ethnicities. Schazjmd (talk) 21:00, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Angelos Charisteas. Robby.is.on (talk) 16:34, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Robby.is.on (talk) 16:43, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at José Ángel Crespo, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 22:51, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Gheorghe Hagi. Robby.is.on (talk) 17:59, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to Serge Gnabry does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. It's not clear why you're making your changes. Please communicate your intentions. Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:21, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Lothar Matthäus. --Jaellee (talk) 10:58, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Mattythewhite (talk) 22:53, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Mattythewhite (talk) 22:34, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, you may be blocked from editing. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 18:06, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Jupp Heynckes. Mattythewhite (talk) 10:53, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at George Weah, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:56, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Anastasios Papadopoulos

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Anastasios Papadopoulos requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://pontosworld.com/index.php/history/biographies/116-anastasios-papadopoulos. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ _Talk 00:11, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Pontic Greeks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pontus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:09, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Gaizka Mendieta. Kosack (talk) 18:12, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Brian Laudrup, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:06, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Javert2113. I noticed that you recently removed content from Jesus without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. — Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 15:36, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Mattythewhite (talk) 11:33, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

Hi there - Wikipedia relies on reliable sources to verify information, especially about living people. You didn't provide a source for your changes to the Kostas Kiassos article, and I couldn't find one either. If you have a reliable source please let me know and we can change the article. Please let me know if you have any questions. Giant Snowman 11:36, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Thiago Silva, you may be blocked from editing. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:05, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Roy Keane. Mattythewhite (talk) 14:27, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Yuri Melikov, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Russian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at José Holebas, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Unsourced content. Mattythewhite (talk) 00:59, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks to prevent you from persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:43, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have 3 months to carefully review Wikipedia:Verifiability

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 months for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.

OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:54, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:02, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]