User talk:Gamerboy4life

January 2020[edit]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. I would suggest reading over WP:VG/GENRE in regards to genres in the lede sentence and the use of open world as a genre. Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 22:23, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Original Research[edit]

I saw your edit on the Maria Wavinya article where you changed the part that stated her eye color was black. The problem is if you’re going to contest that the color of her eye is most likely brown and not black due to some investigations of “yours” that’s an action that contains a serous original research undertone to it which apparently isn’t welcome nor allowed here. Celestina007 (talk) 15:46, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia![edit]

Hello, Gamerboy4life, and welcome to Wikipedia!

An edit that you recently made seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox.

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! Celestina007 (talk) 15:49, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Observation[edit]

I have observed from your edit history that you are new & that you seem to be testing your editing abilities on random articles but you are advised to practice editing in your own sandbox so you don’t appear to be a disruptive editor. For example here, you blue link fairly common terms and here you include an original research in article. In all it seems you are using articles on main-space for edit testing. Celestina007 (talk) 16:00, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Tulisa; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Aoi (青い) (talk) 00:58, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Tulisa; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. –Davey2010^Talk 01:50, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Tulisa 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 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. –Davey2010^Talk 01:52, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Davey2010 you’re coming across a bit gruff, I included sourced content and you removed it for no apparent reason, I’ve taken it to the talk page and would like your input too. Gamerboy4life (talk) 01:56, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons were provided 2-3 times, Don't reinstate the material otherwise you will be blocked. –Davey2010^Talk 01:59, 10 January 2020 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Gamerboy4life reported by User:Davey2010 (Result: ). Thank you. –Davey2010^Talk 02:02, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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.

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 ~~~~}}. Drmies (talk) 02:30, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]