Curiousperson2

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for contributing edits that were made in good faith, but have been deemed to not contribute positively to the article, and thus been reverted. You are welcome to discuss it in the article talk page. Also, you can experiment with your edits in the sandbox or seek advice (see below).

Some good links for newcomers are:

• Help contents – the main help page.
• Quick guide – a "cheatsheet" listing the main editing commands.
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to create your first article
• Avoid conflicts of interest
• Tutorial
• Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and a timestamp. If you need help, check out the Teahouse, ask the Help Desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Once again, welcome! 〜 Adflatuss • talk 05:26, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

October 2025

Hello, I'm TonySt. I noticed that you recently removed content from Ecocide 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. tony 01:06, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

November 2025

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Pseudohistory, you may be blocked from editing. incorrectly uses the accepted historical record as evidence doesn't seem like an accurate description of pseudohistory. Belbury (talk) 19:46, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Oh sorry my bad, I meant distortion of historical record to say a lie. Curiousperson2 (talk) 20:47, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.  Doug Weller talk 20:01, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Approach

Is it possible that there is a language barrier? In your editing history I see a mix of good and very bad English. Do you have a specific editing interest where you would like to improve the encyclopedia? So far your history shows you wandering around political articles doing small edits that are often controversial, unnecessary and/or unsourced. There are places where you can find editors with common interests, with topic specific guidance like style guides and tasks lists, for instance, WikiProjects (Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Directory). It's also possible to consult places like the Wikipedia:Teahouse. I write this because after this second block, if the same problems persist, you are likely to soon be perceived as not being here for the encyclopedia (WP:NOTHERE). ~2025-35304-53 (talk) 06:24, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

iPhone auto correct is mostly to blame. Curiousperson2 (talk) 12:57, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

Is it? Did you see my edit summary here? Are you saying iPhone autocorrect insisted on writing "incorrectly misrepresent" and you yourself couldn't do anything to stop it? If that's what you believe, you can try to explain it to an uninvolved administrator. As Doug Weller told you in the block notice, you can appeal the block by adding {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} to the bottom of this page. Replace "Your reason here" with your actual reason for thinking you should be unblocked and publish the page. Bishonen | tålk 15:51, 26 November 2025 (UTC).

No, that was my bad. Most of the other crap it’s fault though Curiousperson2 (talk) 17:40, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

December 2025

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war, according to the reverts you've made to French Algeria. This means that you are repeatedly reverting content back to how you think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree. Once it is known that there is a disagreement, users are expected to collaborate with others, avoid editing disruptively, and try to reach a consensus – rather than repeatedly reverting the changes made by other users.

Important points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive behavior – regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not engage in edit warring – even if you believe that you are right.

You need to discuss the disagreement on the article's talk page and work towards a revision that represents consensus among everyone involved. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution if discussions reach an impasse. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to engage in edit warring, you may be blocked from editing. M.Bitton (talk) 03:32, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at French Algeria. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. M.Bitton (talk) 03:33, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.  Mfield (Oi!) 04:05, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

January 2026

Hello, I'm TonySt. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Decolonization 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. tony 01:22, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at French Algeria, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. M.Bitton (talk) 12:02, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Operation Mongoose shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing a page's content back to how you believe it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree with your changes. Please stop editing the page and use the talk page to work toward creating a version of the page that represents consensus among the editors involved. Wikipedia provides a page explaining how this is accomplished. If discussions reach an impasse, you can request help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution such as a third opinion. In some cases, you may wish to request page protection while a discussion to resolve the dispute is ongoing.

If you continue edit warring, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia—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, or whether it involves the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also, please 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— if things indicate that you intend to continue reverting content on the page. Mellk (talk) 16:57, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your recent edits to Second Polish Republic when you modified the page, you introduced unknown parameters. Just because you specify |some_param=some_variable does not always mean that variable will display. The |some_param= must be defined in the template. You can look at the documentation for the template you are using but it is also helpful to use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and ensure that the values you have added are displaying correctly. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it. It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. Note I have likely fixed the error by now so check the history of the page to see how it was fixed. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 03:32, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

January 2026

Hello. In a recent edit to the page Transnistria, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the first author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. AusLondonder (talk) 05:13, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi Curiousperson2! I noticed that you recently made an edit at Territory and marked it as "minor", but it may not have been. On Wikipedia, "minor edit" refers only to superficial edits that could never be disputed, such as fixing typos or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not minor, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. DrKay (talk) 17:18, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

February 2026

Hello, I'm Mellk. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Federated state, but you didn't provide a reliable source. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation, your edit is archived in the page history. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mellk (talk) 13:15, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at British Empire. 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. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 05:20, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that one or more recent edits you made did not have an edit summary. Collaboration among editors is fundamental to Wikipedia, and every edit should be explained by a clear edit summary, or by discussion on the talk page. Please use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit or to describe what it changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

or in the visual editor:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Describe what you changed

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. When logged in to your Wikipedia account, you can give yourself a reminder by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary), and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:07, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at British Empire shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing a page's content back to how you believe it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree with your changes. Please stop editing the page and use the talk page to work toward creating a version of the page that represents consensus among the editors involved. Wikipedia provides a page explaining how this is accomplished. If discussions reach an impasse, you can request help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution such as a third opinion. In some cases, you may wish to request page protection while a discussion to resolve the dispute is ongoing.

If you continue edit warring, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia—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, or whether it involves the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also, please 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— if things indicate that you intend to continue reverting content on the page. Belbury (talk) 12:59, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

How is reverting two separate editors one of who has a weird habit of reverting me edit-warring? Curiousperson2 (talk) 13:03, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

"...you are repeatedly changing a page's content back to how you believe it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree with your changes." Belbury (talk) 13:06, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. In a talk page notice above this one, I let you know that minor edits are things like typographical corrections and changes of grammar. Changing the meaning of content, by for example adding or removing content, is not a minor edit. It is disruptive to continue to mark major edits as minor after being asked to stop. DrKay (talk) 17:15, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely

Looking at your editing of British Empire, with your edit warring and useless edit summaries ("Sorry", "Stop being so annoying please"), and considering your history of blocks and warnings, I'm afraid I can't see you as a net positive for the encyclopedia. You have been blocked indefinitely. You can request unblock from an uninvolved administrator by placing {{unblock|your reason here}} on this page. Bishonen | tålk 18:11, 10 February 2026 (UTC).

CuriousPerson2, I don't know if you're planning on appealing the block. If so, I suggest you familiarise yourself with Wikipedia guidelines about editing principles. One significant principle is that no one editor can assert Wikipedia:Ownership of content. Even if you think your edits are good, you're only one editor here; you can't tell other editors to stop changing your edits, as you did on British Empire. Another principle you could look at is Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Editors are encouraged to be Bold in making edits, but if you boldly make edits and find that other editors disagree and are Reverting, you should take the issue to the Talk page for the article, and make your pitch for the edits that you think are appropriate. Wikipedia is built on Wikipedia:Consensus. If you make your pitch but other editors disagree, you have to accept the consensus, even if it goes against your preferred option. Good luck! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 01:44, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

February 2026

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.  Doug Weller talk 14:38, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

Because you have continued editing as Geopolitic lover and Hisotrygeek1920, the following ínformation now applies to your block:

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:36, 2 March 2026 (UTC)