User talk:Zevabelle40 - Wikipedia

Help me edit my user Not working

  Hello, I'm Johnj1995. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Paloma Faith, 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. Johnj1995 (talk) 21:43, 30 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Your recent editing history 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.

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.

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.

I noticed that your reuploads to the respective files of Cindy Beale, Lauren Branning, Stacey Slater are pretty unnecessary and come off as if your priorities lie in personal preference, and not bettering their respective articles, supported by the Jane Beale image war. With all due respect, you are a talented editor, but your subjective overwriting of files is becoming excessive. FishLoveHam (talk) 21:21, 23 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

With respect User:FishLoveHam. The images I’ve uploaded are for a reason. Lauren’s is blurry, Cindy is looking away from the camera and Stacey’s is four years old. Zevabelle40 (talk) 21:57, 23 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sugababes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page O2 Arena. 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) 08:35, 24 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

The most effective way to challenge another user's view about a graph being unnecessary is to explain why that graph is necessary. Try that next time. And do read Wikipedia:Solutions looking for a problem. KyleJoan^talk 23:27, 6 August 2024 (UTC)Reply