User talk:Onpoint12

Darkcore

Hi,

I agree that darkcore was popular between 1992 and 1994. But the definition of darkcore is based on musical criteria. If a track is produced later and is similar to darkcore tracks from early 90's, it's darkcore anyway. The period is only a popularity period, not a definition period. What do you think about that? Ftiercel (talk) 18:32, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rumi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Persian. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 20:23, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rumi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Persian.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Your recent editing history 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. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:32, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the alert. Much of the commentary on the related talk page evidences frustration on the part of fellow editors who feel sourced information is being ignored. I await a meaningful explanation of why the edits of myself and others are being reverted. Onpoint12 (talk) 23:40, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reported

See here. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:21, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 2025

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Al-Biruni, you may be blocked from editing. HistoryofIran (talk) 23:07, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Your recent editing history 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. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:19, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the warning. I'm not doing the reverting here and I'm not seeing any reason stated for the reverts you are making. Onpoint12 (talk) 23:23, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reported

See here. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:42, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 2025

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Al-Biruni. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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.

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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 23:46, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]