Radlrb

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 29 (number), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Factor.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:10, 19 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 70 (number), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Point.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:25, 1 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

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. 100.36.106.199 (talk) 09:37, 4 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, I'm Dakane2. I noticed that you recently removed content from 55 (number) 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. Dakane2 (talk) 19:24, 14 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Per consensus at the administrator's noticeboard (link), the following topic ban has been enacted:

"Radlrb (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic banned from mathematical numbers, broadly construed."

Please read Wikipedia:Banning policy#Topic ban, Wikipedia:Banning policy#Exceptions to limited bans and Wikipedia:Banning policy#Evasion and enforcement.

Details regarding appealing a community-imposed topic ban are contained at Wikipedia:Banning policy#Appeals of bans imposed by the community. This topic ban will be logged at Wikipedia:Editing restrictions.

Regards,
Daniel (talk) 01:53, 18 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Cool, I don't mind at all, being punished for doing the right thing is not a bad thing, just confusion. Radlrb (talk) 14:52, 18 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading File:Sums (1-22) add to prime numbers.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)Reply