Please stop adding
unsourced content, as you did on
7 World Trade Center. This violates
Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be
blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Acroterion
(talk) 13:52, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
- Especially when it's being used to advance a conspiracy theory: no YouTube, please, it's deprecated for lots of reasons, and remember that the biographies of living persons policy applies when you're attempting to quote living individuals to advance such theories. Acroterion (talk) 13:53, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at 7 World Trade Center 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. Acroterion (talk) 13:53, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in the September 11 attacks. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Acroterion (talk) 13:54, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
You may request a change of username and unblock if you intend to make useful contributions instead of promoting your business or organization. To do this, first search
Special:CentralAuth for available usernames that comply with the
username policy. Once you have found an acceptable username, post the text {{
unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with your new username and replace the text "Your reason here" with your reasons to be unblocked. In your reasons, you must:
- Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure requirement.
- Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
- Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.
{{
unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your reason here" with the reasons you believe the block was an error, and publish the page.
Ian.thomson (
talk) 10:48, 4 May 2022 (UTC)