User talk:Lcxzdf56

January 2018[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Sudan. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 12:10, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Sudan 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. Kleuske (talk) 13:48, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

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:Lcxzdf56 reported by User:Kleuske (Result: ). Thank you. Kleuske (talk) 14:09, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}. only (talk) 14:16, 4 January 2018 (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).

Lcxzdf56 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I want to contribute again to the construction of Wikipedia

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. 331dot (talk) 10:37, 18 June 2018 (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.

Return to Wikipedia[edit]

I want active and, constructive participation in the Wikipedia community. Lcxzxf56 (talk) 12:07, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As I posted above, you need to explain that you understand what you did and why it was wrong, how you won't do it again, and what constructive contributions you intend to make if unblocked. Just saying you want to participate is not enough. 331dot (talk) 12:13, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I admit that I was wrong and, what I did was contrary to the Wikipedia policy. and to abide by it and I do not disagree but, at the time I was a new user I did not understand what the terms and conditions for good use. I intend in the future in constructive contribution that does not, conflict with the policy of Wikipedia.Lcxzxf56 (talk) 12:43, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]