User talk:186.96.212.9

June 2021

Hello, I'm Uranium Site. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Roti have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Uranium Site (talk) 20:08, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

July 2021

Hello, I'm Rdp060707. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Brother Resistance, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ----Rdp060707|talk 08:19, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

January 2023

Hello, I'm Philipnelson99. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Timeline of United States history (2010–present)—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Philipnelson99 (talk) 22:45, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

August 2023

Hi 186.96.212.9! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Schindler's List several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Schindler's List, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 14:27, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, you may be blocked from editing. Acroterion (talk) 02:59, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

No, the ADL has not designated the Japanese naval ensign as a hate symbol. It's objected to by a variety of people, but the ADL hasn't designated it that way. You seem to be on a mission to label a lot of things as war crimes based on your personal assessment, without references to back that up. In many cases you may be right, but references are compulsory. . Please stop inserting your own opinions or original research into articles. Acroterion (talk) 03:06, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Similarly, while the attack on Pearl Harbor has been described as a war crime in some circumstances, it's not a label that is broadly applied, and simply sticking a category on something that isn't supported in the referenced text of the article is deprecated. Please do not substitute your own analysis for that of reliable sources. Acroterion (talk) 03:18, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits

Hello. I enjoyed your addition to Japanese war crimes. Please consider signing up for an account so that other users can more easily thank you for your edits, track your contributions, and discuss with you as an individual. It can also be fun to accumulate a little Wikipedia career that you can look back at. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 21:32, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Edit-warring

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 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; read about 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 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:26, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

The Oxford online dictionary says torture is "the action or practice of inflicting severe pain or suffering on someone as a punishment or in order to force them to do or say something." That's not what Mengele was doing; he was conducting misguided medical experiments. If you have sources that say otherwise, please post a note on the article's talk page detailing what you've found. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 13:38, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

---