User talk:ITSROYALTY

Welcome!

Hello, ITSROYALTY, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Olaf Scholz did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! Joyous! Noise! 13:44, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Royal titles

In general, when writing about royalty, we do not use their title in the lead. Instead, we just use their name, and list any royal styles in the infobox. (See the article on Charles III.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:48, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom of Denmark

The Danish Realm includes Greenland and the Faroes. There is no need to list them separately. It's like writing Charles III is king of the United Kingdom, Scotland and Gibraltar. King of UK is sufficient because the other two are included in the first. DrKay (talk) 15:13, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 2025

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. 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. FMSky (talk) 15:18, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Prince Michael of Kent, you may be blocked from editing. Celia Homeford (talk) 10:19, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Writing about royalty on Wikipedia

Hi, ITSROYALTY! Welcome to Wikipedia. Your username certainly fits your interests! I know it's frustrating to have your edits reverted over and over. I think you've jumped right into editing a little fast, and maybe you haven't had a chance to look over our guidelines. I recommend reading this page about the naming conventions when writing about royalty. That may help. I'm going to drop a welcome message just below this, with some other handy links. Joyous! Noise! 15:36, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, ITSROYALTY!

I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Joyous! Noise! 15:37, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 2025

Hi ITSROYALTY! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:21, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon 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. Celia Homeford (talk) 10:21, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have now performed four reverts in the last 24 hours. You must undo your last revert. Celia Homeford (talk) 10:23, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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. Thank you. Celia Homeford (talk) 11:17, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 2025

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon) for a period of 1 week for edit warring. 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 think 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 ~~~~}}. Acroterion (talk) 12:00, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Burcu Özberk. C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 15:50, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]