A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Han American is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Han American until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. -- benlisquare _{T• C• E} 16:26, 10 May 2015 (UTC) reply

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mandarin language. Since you had some involvement with the Mandarin language redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Si Trew ( talk) 17:36, 1 April 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Han Chinese, did not appear constructive and have been undone. 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. Please come on the talk page and discuss. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 07:10, 19 August 2016 (UTC) reply

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Han Chinese. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. 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; 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.
Stop edit warring. I am politely asking you to revert you last edit. Your edits are disruptive. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 07:14, 19 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Your recent editing history at Han Chinese shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 article's 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 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.

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.
You are edit warring against multiple users now. Can you please revert your last edits and come on the talk page? Lemongirl942 ( talk) 07:18, 19 August 2016 (UTC) reply

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:Lysimachi reported by User:Lemongirl942 (Result: ). Thank you. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 07:23, 19 August 2016 (UTC) reply

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Han Taiwanese. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. 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; 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. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 16:40, 19 August 2016 (UTC) reply

I'm specifically asking you to step back. If you continue your WP:OWN and POV pushing, I will take you to ANI. -- Lemongirl942 ( talk) 16:41, 19 August 2016 (UTC) reply

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. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{ unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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.

The full report is at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Lysimachi reported by User:Lemongirl942 (Result: Blocked). Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 17:53, 19 August 2016 (UTC) reply

This is the only warning you will receive about ownership of articles, which you showed at Han Taiwanese. The next time you continue to disruptively edit Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 09:31, 21 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Hey EdJohnston. I'm sorry but I am having doubts about the competency of this editor. They are relentlessly POV pushing. I also think they have a difficultly understanding English and just do not understand how discussions work here. -- Lemongirl942 ( talk) 10:59, 21 August 2016 (UTC) reply

The lack of response on this page makes me wonder if they are actually listening. -- Lemongirl942 ( talk) 11:00, 21 August 2016 (UTC) reply

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Han Chinese. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. 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; 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. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 09:17, 22 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Are you even reading this? Do you know you can reply here? -- Lemongirl942 ( talk) 11:13, 22 August 2016 (UTC) reply

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! The thread is Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Han_Taiwanese.23Lead_sentence_WikiLink -- Lemongirl942 ( talk) 02:07, 26 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Han Taiwanese, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 13:12, 27 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Please stop continuing to remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Han Taiwanese, without resolving the problem that the template refers to. This may be considered disruptive editing. Further edits of this type may result in your account being blocked from editing. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 23:30, 27 August 2016 (UTC) reply

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove the maintenance templates from Wikipedia articles without resolving the problem that the template refers to, as you did at Han Taiwanese. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 23:32, 28 August 2016 (UTC) reply

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is " Talk:Han Taiwanese#Lead_sentence_WikiLink".The discussion is about the topic Han Taiwanese. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --— UY Scuti ^Talk 13:18, 30 August 2016 (UTC) reply

This is the only warning you will receive about ownership of articles, which you showed at Han Taiwanese. The next time you continue to disruptively edit Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 18:51, 9 September 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, Lysimachi. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The thread is Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#Is mentioning "Han Chinese" in an article Han Taiwanese a violation of NPOV. -- Lemongirl942 ( talk) 18:58, 9 September 2016 (UTC) reply

I don't know if you even know that this talk page exists. Your edits are seriously bordering on WP:OWN. Could you at least acknowledge that you have read this? -- Lemongirl942 ( talk) 09:49, 11 September 2016 (UTC) reply

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Lysimachi_WP:OWN_and_WP:CIR_issues -- Lemongirl942 ( talk) 15:47, 11 September 2016 (UTC) reply

Please see my post in that thread. In my opinion, an admin would be justified in blocking you for disruption if you continue to revert about the definition of Han-related groups such as the Han Chinese without first getting consensus on a talk page. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 16:03, 11 September 2016 (UTC) reply

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Han Chinese. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. 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; 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. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 15:03, 15 September 2016 (UTC) reply

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:Lysimachi reported by User:Lemongirl942 (Result: ). Thank you. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 16:12, 15 September 2016 (UTC) reply

This is the only warning you will receive about ownership of articles, which you showed at Han Taiwanese. The next time you continue to disruptively edit Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Please stop for goodness sake. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 03:11, 16 September 2016 (UTC) reply

Can you even reply here for goodness sake. It's frustrating to deal with you and your constant refusal to WP:DROPTHESTICK. -- Lemongirl942 ( talk) 03:15, 16 September 2016 (UTC) reply

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48h for edit-warring-- Ymblanter ( talk) 07:53, 16 September 2016 (UTC). Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{ unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. reply

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Han Taiwanese. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. 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; 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.
Please stop reverting. I started a discussion and you don't bother to reply at all. What you doing is blatant WP:OWN behaviour and I suggest you to stop. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 09:49, 18 September 2016 (UTC) reply

This is the only warning you will receive about ownership of articles, which you showed at Han Chinese. The next time you continue to disruptively edit Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 09:51, 18 September 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Han Taiwanese, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chen Da. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:53, 18 September 2016 (UTC) reply

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Han Taiwanese. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. 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; 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. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 19:27, 20 September 2016 (UTC) reply

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Han Taiwanese. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. 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; 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. Montanabw ^(talk) 22:05, 20 September 2016 (UTC) reply

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:Lysimachi reported by User:Lemongirl942 (Result: ). Thank you. Lemongirl942 ( talk) 06:29, 23 September 2016 (UTC) reply

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring, as you did at Han Taiwanese. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{ unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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.   slakr^{\  talk /} 00:13, 27 September 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, Lysimachi. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello. I invite you to join a centralized discussion about naming issues related to China and Taiwan. Szqecs ( talk) 04:54, 6 April 2017 (UTC) reply

The name Liao dynasty does not mean that Khitan state wasn't an empire. On the contrary, it's following the convention used for the various Chinese empires: Yuan dynasty, Tang dynasty, Song dynasty, etc.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me | See what I have done) 03:49, 18 May 2017 (UTC) reply

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Chinese people, 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. Citobun ( talk) 14:50, 8 June 2017 (UTC) reply

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article. OhanaUnited ^{Talk page} 03:13, 9 June 2017 (UTC) reply

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for pushing personal POV on China/Taiwan/Hong Kong pages. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{ unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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.   OhanaUnited ^{Talk page} 19:29, 11 June 2017 (UTC) reply

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Lysimachi ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))

---

Request reason:

I try to find reasons for the block from my recent edits that have been reverted by the administrator who blocked me and by the user Citobun. But I still don't know exactly why the block could be imposed per WP:BP. Here is my review:

• On Hong Kong International Airport, I changed "destinations in Mainland China (with 45 destinations)" to "other destinations in China (with 45 destinations)" because the other destinations also include Haikou on the Hainan Island, which is not on the mainland. Is this pushing personal POV?
• My edit on China was reverted by the user, but that revert was again reverted by another user JohnBlackburne. If my edit was pushing personal POV, was JohnBlackburne's too?
• On Taiwan after World War II, I changed the name of the country China to government of China because in that sentence it was contrasted with the government of the Republic of China and removed a link to the Chinese page 臺灣省行政長官公署 (because it looks red) and instead added the Chinese name in parentheses. Is this pushing personal POV?
• On Same-sex marriage in Taiwan, I removed the distinguish template "Not to be confused with Recognition of same-sex unions in China", which the blocking administrator added back without any reason. But I still don't understand why "Same-sex marriage in Taiwan" would be confused with "Recognition of same-sex unions in China" and why that template must be kept there. Is this pushing personal POV?
• On Chinese people, I changed Special Administrative Regions to autonomous regions, which are the main regions where most ethnic groups reside, and reduced the redundancy of the ethnic groups section and the part on Taiwanese people, which should be mainly treated in Taiwanese people per WP:NPOV. Is this pushing personal POV?
• On Teng Yu-hsien, I removed the unreferenced template (because I added references and update links), removed the expand Chinese template (because the article already has quite some content from the Chinese page, and more importantly, 李臨秋 doesn't correspond to this page at all), changed "Mandarin Chinese" to "Mandarin" (because the languages Hokkien and Hakka are also Chinese, it's weird and redundant to add Chinese only to Mandarin), and linked Mandarin and Hakka to their language pages. Is this pushing personal POV?
• On Taiwanese people, I added native names in Mandarin and Hakka, removed unnecessary country name rephrasing, made the sentences on the "four great ethnic groups" more concise, changed "Mandarin Chinese, Hokkien, Hakka" to "Mandarin, Hokkien, Hakka" (as aforementioned) and removed the last sentence about Kinmen and Matzu because not all people there have the same national identity, as shown in more recent studies (i.e., the original claim cannot be verified per WP:V). Is this pushing personal POV?

Lysimachi ( talk) 00:36, 12 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Decline reason:

In order:

• Yes, since Mainland China includes Hainan and doesn't mean the geographical "mainland".
• That should be discussed on the article's talk page.
• You also removed relevant "See also" links. And removing an interlanguage link that pointed to a relevant article in another language while showing that an English article may need to be written wasn't particularly helpful.
• This one looks like collateral damage to me that was caught up in the reversal of the rest of your edits.
• You changed the focus of the "Chinese people" article to effectively make it say that the Taiwanese aren't considered Chinese. I think the PRC would disagree with that, as would the reference you removed. So yes, this is POV-pushing.
• I think you'll find it difficult to explain why you removed the {{ chinese text}} template from Teng Yu-hsien except in an attempt to downplay any mention of "Chinese".
• Again you downplay "Chinese-ness" of Taiwan, going so far as to remove the official name of the country.

In summary, you have been heavily POV-pushing across multiple articles. Huon ( talk) 19:19, 15 June 2017 (UTC) reply

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

The official titles of the offices are President of the Republic of China, not "President of Taiwan". You would be advised to adhere to WP:NPOV and not push your own views over the PRC/ROC situation.-- Tærkast ( Discuss) 19:07, 29 September 2017 (UTC) reply

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Presidential elections in Taiwan. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.-- Tærkast ( Discuss) 21:50, 29 September 2017 (UTC) reply

Further to this, see WP:OTHERNAMES. You ought to understand the entire policy before branding it, especially given that the office titles are ROC, not "President of Taiwan", of which you further introduced more inaccuracies and POV-pushing into it. -- Tærkast ( Discuss) 21:50, 29 September 2017 (UTC) reply

WIth this edit you tried to replace 'Han Chinese' with 'Han people' within the article on the Han Chinese. Be aware that a move request for this article (wanting to use 'Han people' instead of Han Chinese) was recently turned down. You should not keep trying to change the name within the article unless you can get consensus for it. Otherwise it is edit warring. It is usual for the article title to be echoed in the first line of the article text -- you were changing the first line so that it did not match the article's own title. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 02:52, 30 September 2017 (UTC) reply

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Template:Taiwan topics, 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. General Ization ^Talk 14:19, 13 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Your recent editing history at Template:Taiwan topics shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 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.

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. General Ization ^Talk 14:34, 13 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Your recent editing history at Template:Taiwan topics shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 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.

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. JohnBlackburne ^words _deeds 13:12, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, Lysimachi. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC) reply

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on University of Hyderabad. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. 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; 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. Muhandes ( talk) 22:06, 10 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Academia Sinica, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gongguan ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:28, 11 April 2018 (UTC) reply

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. Thank you. Tærkast ( Discuss) 11:33, 12 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 17:27, 26 October 2018 (UTC) reply

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Academia Sinica, you may be blocked from editing. "China" was not established in 1949. CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 15:47, 7 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello, Lysimachi. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:45, 24 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:38, 23 November 2021 (UTC) reply