User talk:Bobhhik

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for contributing edits that were made in good faith, but have been deemed not to contribute positively to the article. These edits have thus been reverted. Wikipedia's page on unacceptable additions may explain why. If you'd like to experiment with the syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.

Some good links for newcomers are:

Help contents – the main help page.
Quick guide – a "cheatsheet" listing the main editing commands.
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to create your first article
Tutorial
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and a timestamp. If you need help, check out the Teahouse, ask the Help Desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Once again, welcome! 〜 Adflatuss • talk 01:59, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

Hello, I'm Tarl N.. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Battle of Cempoala, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Tarl N. (discuss) 04:42, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire 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. Tarl N. (discuss) 19:47, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Santo Domingo. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although 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. Yoshi24517 (Chat) (Very Busy) 19:55, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks 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 ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:21, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:Norprobr per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Norprobr. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Girth Summit _(blether) 14:57, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]