Jump to content

User talk:Volkovp56

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

February 2012

[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article List of iCarly episodes, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. AussieLegend (talk) 14:29, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May 2012

[edit]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to List of Victorious episodes, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:10, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

June 2012

[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to List of The Game episodes, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

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 List of True Jackson, VP episodes, you may be blocked from editing. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:25, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as seen in List of Victorious episodes, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Kevinbrogers (talk) 15:50, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

July 2012

[edit]

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to List of Victorious episodes. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:30, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to List of How to Rock episodes, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from List of How to Rock episodes into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to make a note in an edit summary at the source page as well. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

[edit]
Hello, Volkovp56. You have new messages at Talk:List of How to Rock episodes.
Message added 05:33, 9 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:33, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012

[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to List of Victorious episodes does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Reverting someones edits without explanation is the same as declaring them to be vandalism. I started a discussion on the talk page about this issue - please contribute there if you disagree with my edits. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:47, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at List of Victorious episodes shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:54, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to List of How to Rock episodes. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:22, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at List of Victorious episodes shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 11:59, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to List of Victorious episodes, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:44, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

[edit]
Hello, Volkovp56. You have new messages at Talk:List of How to Rock episodes.
Message added 15:53, 4 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:53, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

November 2012

[edit]

Your recent editing history at List of How to Rock episodes shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. As stated in the edit history of the article and the talk page of the article linked to by the above talkback message, your changes are not being accepted by other editors. Please discuss this on the talk page and make your case there instead of just asserting your edit desires with reverts. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:42, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

[edit]

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. Thank you. --Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:09, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. 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 adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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.

Per WP:AN3#User:Volkovp56 reported by User:Geraldo Perez (Result: 48h). EdJohnston (talk) 06:28, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

July 2013

[edit]

Information icon Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to How to Rock, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:12, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

August 2013

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you recently removed some content without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, you can 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! Materialscientist (talk) 11:00, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]