User talk:Arbeit10

March 2014

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to 2014 Sony Ericsson Open, 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. Please indicate in your edit summary which article is being repeated. KJ ^{click here} 00:08, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Francesca Schiavone, you may be blocked from editing.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Francesca Schiavone was changed by Arbeit10 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.958117 on 2014-03-17T13:59:29+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 13:59, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tournament names

I noticed a revert by you on a couple tennis articles today. You have a point on the WTA Tour Championships since it is the title of the heading, but you can't just link the city. It should be unlinked or per guidelines I think it should have the actual tournament name. In the other tables we must have the non-sponsored tournament name directly linked. Also we do not put number 1's for the first tournament victory, we start with number 2. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:04, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wozniacki

12 tournaments (by surfaces) are missing from the total sum by surfaces in "Career Statistic" subsection of the table, but I don't know on which surfaces she played which tournament out of those 12. So, total is OK, but in totals by surfaces something is missing. It seems that, in the past few months, whoever was updating the article, he didn't update every single number regularly and so there are discrepancies here. I edit this (part of) article on BS Wiki using the data from EN Wiki and I noticed this issue by purely calculating numbers. And I saw that you were last who edited the article here, so I decided to inform you. -- KWiki (talk) 16:18, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for informing. I'll try to pay attention on it. Arbeit10 (talk) 10:06, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014

Your recent editing history at 2014_Wimbledon_Championships_–_Men's_Singles 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. 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. Amortias (T)(C) 18:52, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wait until consensus is reached on the talk page

May I remind you

The three-revert rule

Shortcut

WP:3RR

Editors who engage in edit warring are liable to be blocked from editing to prevent further disruption. While any edit warring may lead to sanctions, there is a bright-line rule called the three-revert rule (3RR), the violation of which often leads to a block.

The three-revert rule states:

An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period. An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert. Violations of the rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Any appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside the 24-hour slot is likely to be treated as an edit-warring violation. See below for exemptions.

A "page" means any page on Wikipedia, including talk and project space. A "revert" means any edit (or administrative action) that reverses the actions of other editors, in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material. A series of consecutive saved revert edits by one user with no intervening edits by another user counts as one revert.--Navops47 (talk) 23:39, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please feel free to see both this article List_of_tennis_rivalries and the talk page comments 12 meetings between Evert & Court have now been sourced & cited and we are just missing the Virginia Slims Rye Brooke Cup meeting in 1975 not just 9 meetings only as you suggested in your reason for revert in which you did not provide evidence.--Navops47 (talk) 12:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]