User talk:Gree11

Hello, I'm JPxG. I noticed that in this edit to Carolina Herrera, 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. jp×g 22:39, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You made this edit to the page Bugatti without explanation, and ignoring the remark to take an intended change to the talk page first. The content has now been restored. Mark in wiki (talk) 07:53, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You removed sourced info or sources from various articles (for instance with this edit to Carolina Herrera, this edit to Karl Lagerfeld and this edit to Diana Vreeland). For now, the content has been restored. But in the future, it may be wise to use the edit summary to explain why you think the information should be removed, or to try and gain consensus for the removal first on the talk page of the articles. Thank you. Mark in wiki (talk) 18:47, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Again, please stop removing or changing sourced info from articles without adequately explaining why, as you did in this edit. This is not considered constructive. If you want to change sourced info, please go to the talk page to explain why and try and gain consensus. Mark in wiki (talk) 19:23, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. NoonIcarus (talk) 23:47, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Carolina Herrera. 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:

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 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. Even if you edit war slowly over the course of several days it is still edit warring. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 23:56, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for edit warring, as you did at Carolina Herrera. 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 read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 05:11, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to

Joe Jonas

added links pointing to Tonight, Love Bug, Hold On and Fly with Me

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Denisarona. I noticed that you recently removed content from Paco Rabanne without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Denisarona (talk) 08:24, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. You've been warned before not to remove sourced text, especially not without giving any rationale for it, and obviously ignored those notices on purpose. This is disruptive of you and needs to stop. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 12:39, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm NebY. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to London have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. NebY (talk) 09:14, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:48, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]