User talk:Zgirard55

January 2025

Hello, I'm Adakiko. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Lymphoma—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Adakiko (talk) 05:14, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Swimming at the 1995 Pan American Games – Women's 800 metre freestyle. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 05:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Lymphoma 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.

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. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 05:23, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to assume bad faith when dealing with other editors, as you did at Lymphoma, you may be blocked from editing. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 05:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 05:27, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. — Newslinger talk 05:29, 28 January 2025 (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).

Zgirard55 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Someone else used my account login to edit and it wasn't me Zgirard55 (talk) 02:32, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

In that, case, we're sorry, but we cannot unblock compromised accounts. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 03:17, 30 January 2025 (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.