User talk:Sreedb
David Bowie and reliable sources[edit]
Hello, Sreedb. Please see the talk page of the IP from which you were editing. —ATS 🖖 talk 21:16, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Sreedb, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]
|
Hi Sreedb! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 3 January 2017 (UTC) |
January 2017[edit]
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at David Bowie. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.
If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a blockage. Thank you. O Fortuna!...Imperatrix mundi. 13:22, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
David Bowie and Buddha of Suburbia[edit]
Hi Sreedb, I've left a response for you at Talk:David Bowie#continued reversion of edit. Nortonius (talk) 14:37, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
A Barnstar for You![edit]
|
The Excellent New Editor's Barnstar A new editor on the right path | |
| Thank you for your research and incisive analysis for the James Baldwin article! - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) 23:00, 11 May 2017 (UTC) |