I am the state

I am the state, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi I am the state! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cordless Larry (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 20:04, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Sovereign state

Please do not change "sovereign state" to "country". The term "sovereign state" is clear, unambiguous, and links to an article. The term "country" is ambiguous - for example Scotland is a country, but not a sovereign state. This ambiguity is mentioned in the article on "country". Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:09, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

August 2017

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Canada. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been 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 notice boards.
• 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. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 17:10, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Canada. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
Multiple editors have reverted your preferred version. Please stop to discuss. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:15, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

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:I_am_the_state reported by User:Walter Görlitz (Result: ). Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:23, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

August 2017

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  Floquenbeam (talk) 17:42, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

You're kind of out of control, here. When multiple people on multiple articles tell you to stop, tell you to discuss first, tell you you're not right, it is irrational to just keep trying to force your preference, and to assume you're right and everyone else is wrong. If this behavior continues when the block expires, I will simply reblock indefinitely. i do not plan to slowly increase the duration of the blocks. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:45, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

@Floquenbeam: That's probably a certainty anyways, considering this is most likely User:Motivação (see SPI). CU request is pending. GAB^gab 17:53, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Ah, ok. I'm not familiar with that editor, but a returning banned/blocked editor seems likely, so feel free to reblock if you're confident. SPI's can take some time these days, apparently. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:58, 25 August 2017 (UTC)