Hello, I'm Vaco98. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions 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 or the Help desk. Thanks. Vaco98 (talk) 16:12, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Orphism (religion), 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. Haploidavey (talk) 18:45, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Orphism (religion), it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. I've been combing through your changes to the above article; you seem to have added material interpreted by yourself, rather than using reliable, academic secondary sources to back up what at the moment are your personal researches and assertions. That's something we can't do. Everything in Wikipedia, no matter how arcane or speculative, must be supported by reliable sources. Haploidavey (talk) 18:53, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello 103.59.178.228! Your additions to Orphism (religion) have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Original source [1] Even if this is removed from the current version, the material remains in the article history. It should be notified to an administrator who specialises in this kind of removal Thank you. Haploidavey (talk) 19:28, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've just looked carefully at the site linked above. Problems arising from using it are less to do with copyright than with reliability as a specialist source for article content. The site is constructed and maintained by volunteers, whose contributions are checked by other volunteers. Just like Wikipedia, it is not a reliable source. It can't be linked or copied for any Wikipedia article. Haploidavey (talk) 20:04, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that in this edittoOrphism (religion), you removed content without adequately 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, the removed content has been restored. 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. Materialscientist (talk) 11:47, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm 2G0o2De0l. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributionstoDiogenes Laertius 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 or the Help desk. Thanks. 2G0o2De0l (talk) 21:03, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia 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. DarmaniLink (talk) 23:17, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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. DarmaniLink (talk) 23:19, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop your disruptive editing.
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at List of rape victims from ancient history and mythology, you may be blocked from editing. Yoshi24517 (Chat) (Very Busy) 23:19, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Religious based disruptive editing by an IP. Thank you. 64andtim (chat) 00:26, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You have been blocked temporarily from editing 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 review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.
Cullen328 (talk) 00:53, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 | This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address. |
