~2026-22476-70

April 2026

Hello, I'm Adamstom.97. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Star Trek: Section 31 have been undone because they 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. adamstom97 (talk) 11:07, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

The pattern is clear Adam, you've reverted the same editor three times already on that Section 31 article alone, this person is not editing in good faith. They have own personal ideas about section order. MOS:FILM clearly stating that There is no defined order of the sections but for years they have tried try to force their preferred version where ever they go. They also refuse to pay any attention to WP:OVERSECTION. -- ~2026-20754-35 (talk) 23:39, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Arnold Schwarzenegger filmography. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.

• If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• If you need help, please see the Introduction to Wikipedia, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
• The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Arnold Schwarzenegger filmography was changed by ~2026-22476-70 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.953701 on 2026-04-20T11:14:54+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 11:14, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Cadillacs and Dinosaurs (role-playing game), did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Sciencefish (talk) 14:15, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Cadillacs and Dinosaurs (role-playing game). 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. The full name is on the cover of the book on the article page. Stop removing it. Sciencefish (talk) 12:18, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

May 2026

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that your recent edit to Cadillacs and Dinosaurs (video game) 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. If you use a registered account, you can give yourself a reminder by setting Preferences → Editing → Editor → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary), and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! Waxworker (talk) 08:58, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

June 2026

Please refrain from adding non-constructive sections. See WP:OVERSECTION. For example, Blade (1998 film) or Escape from New York should not be split unnecessarily. Thank you. AriuCH (talk) 18:31, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

He is a repeat offender btw, see User_talk:~2026-27466-54 for a recent example. He is persistent and has been like this for years, not editing collaboratively and imposing his preferred version on articles even with there is little or no reason for rearranging.

User_talk:~2026-34476-41 He seems to have been banned again at least temporarily but no doubt he will reappear again. -- ~2026-20754-35 (talk) 01:57, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Less than a week and back at it again already (diff) -- ~2026-20754-35 (talk) 14:00, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make a disruptive edit to Wikipedia contrary to the Manual of Style, as you did at Blade (1998 film). Your behavior matches that of Special:Contributions/~2026-34476-41, which was blocked for the same disruptive pattern on this article, including repeated violations of MOS:OVERSECTION. AriuCH (talk) 15:25, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Stop edit warring (diff) and read MOS:SLASH. Also it is tedious fancruft to edit war about "spin-off/sequel" in the lead section of a film article, normal ordinary readers do not care about this the way nerds about canon and continuity, it is just another film. A spin-off is merely a more specific subtype of sequel, and that is detail most people do not care about. You're wasting your own time and everyone else's edit warring about this pedantry. -- ~2026-20754-35 (talk) 11:40, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for block evasion.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request through the unblock wizard or through your talk page.  EvergreenFir (talk) 17:48, 21 June 2026 (UTC)