User talk:UncleSamUSofA

Welcome!

Hello, UncleSamUSofA, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. 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! Cupoftea155 (talk) 21:49, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 2016

Hello, I'm C.Fred. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Robert HP Young seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 21:58, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Robert HP Young, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 22:06, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There was one blog post in the lede, and that was rightly removed. However, Outdoor is a reliable source. The claims about his run are probably best left out of the intro right now, but they should be mentioned in the article. —C.Fred (talk) 22:19, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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 at Robert HP Young, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 22:28, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Robert HP Young. This edit so grossly distorts what is said in the cited source that I can no longer assume that your intent is to edit constructively. —C.Fred (talk) 23:14, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Robert HP Young 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. NeilN ^{talk to me} 23:36, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article. KGirlTrucker87^{talk what I'm been doing} 00:39, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Robert HP Young. 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. NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:55, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]