Hello, 333-blue, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as 2014 Hong Kong Tennis Open – Doubles, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Starting an article
• Your first article
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! ...William 14:46, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you move a page maliciously, as you did at Template:WTA Tour Championships. first it's misusing minor edits, than moving pages without consensus now templates without consensus. Wolbo, Nyth83 and I have warned you multiple times. Are you a banned editor using a new handle? Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:39, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is 2014, we use "WTA Finals" in the article, so please do not move the template back to "WTA Tour Championships". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 333-blue (talk • contribs) 08:53, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure who "we" is...it's just you from what I can see. I will continue to use it until consensus says otherwise. The long used name has been WTA Tour Championships... much longer than WTA Finals. You will likely be blocked if you continue to move pages without consensus. If you think it should be moved please bring it to the proper talk page as I suggested in previous posts... There we can address your concerns and make a decision on whether to move it or not. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:09, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK. 333-blue (talk)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to move pages to bad titles contrary to naming conventions or consensus, as you did at Taipei WTA Ladies Open, you may be blocked from editing. You have been warned many times for moving pages against consensus. Stop before you get blocked. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:01, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 14:04, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

this edit: [1] was pointless and disruptive, and shows no familiarity with editing here. combined with your edits above, you will likely be blocked if you continue in this fashion.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:11, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 2014 Open GDF Suez de Limoges may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * {{flagicon|AUT}} [[Tamira Paszek]] (replaced by [[Maryna Zanevska]]])

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:20, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please follow the nomination instructions at WP:GAN so that the bot does not revert your nomination.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:47, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am fairly certain that you did not get my point because you continue to try to fight with the bot. your latest edit was again reverted by the bot. I am not sure what you are trying to do, but in most cases the problem is that you are attempting to edit WP:GAN when you should be editing the article's talk page. If you make the proper edits to the {{GA nominee}} on the article's talk page, you will probably see the bot make the correction you want. No matter what changes you make to WP:GAN, the bot will change it back to the correct interpretation of the parameters in the template on the article's talk page. As long as you have the wrong information their the bot will keep changing back to refer to that wrong information. Please see the instructions at GAN so that you can figure out how to put the proper parameters in the template.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:22, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have made two nominations to Articles for deletion which make little or no sense. In the case of Louis Fuzelier, I have closed the discussion as "Keep" because "Too short" is not a valid reason for deletion. In the case of 2015 ASB Classic I have noted in the discussion that you should explain your reasoning, although I doubt that you can. Otherwise I will close that discussion also. You really need to spend a long time studying the reasons for deleting articles before you make nominations. You have not been with us for long. I hope you can progress and become a fruitful editor, but your record so far is not good. --Bduke (Discussion) 20:55, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 333-blue,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged 2015 Australian Open – Mixed Doubles for deletion, because it's too short to identify the subject of the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can , but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Jaladhi (talk) 13:44, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2014–15 UEFA Champions League. 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. QED237 (talk) 00:19, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:333-blue reported by User:Qed237 (Result: ). Thank you. QED237 (talk) 14:01, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you removing the cite template which is a proper way of sourcing and is being used everywhere? QED237 (talk) 15:12, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring, as you did at 2014–15 UEFA Champions League. 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 appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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.  Bbb23 (talk) 16:49, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

這位同學，我從中文維基見證了你被封鎖到英文維基對你的封鎖。我不知道你在中文維基做了什麼事被封鎖，但在優良條目和特色條目的評選頁面，多次看到你無理由的提優或是重審，但您的意見實在是沒有什麼站得住腳的理由。至於英文版，我看了您的編輯，多半是刪除別人的編輯，更改別人的編輯，可是都是無建設性的編輯。我覺得，您要多跟一些默默做出有用編輯的人學習，而不是掙扎在無謂的復出中。

PS，我只是路過，多管閒事了一下，請您不要介懷。祝安好。--Chinyen Lu (talk) 03:46, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Chinyen Lu: Not at all: Example.--333-blue 04:16, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, sorry, what do you mean? Cause I don't understand where is the problem - "This section is outdated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. " If there are only five confirmed withdrawals (Sock, Haas, Tipsarević, Rosol and Stepanek), and four of them would not be among seeds anyway, only Rosol should be listed, shouldn't he? TheLightBlue (talk) 11:47, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. QED237 (talk) 12:34, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Qed237: I wish to say that it is one's choice whether or not to mark any edit as minor. I don't think there is a need for this notification, because you can't put your own personal preference/Wikipedia feature as something you insist people must do. Also, there is no absolute occasion or decision on which edit to be or not to be minor. You are currently misleading Wikipedians, especially newbies. If you actually want to "suggest" or "introduce" this, you should use plain text and in your own words. 175.156.214.74 (talk) 17:48, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, I'm sorry, I think you are referring to his edits that shouldn't be marked minor. I wish to give a word of advice to 333-blue, to understand more about Wikipedia and familiarise before contributing to project pages. As per my advice on the Chinese Wikipedia. 建議您心平氣和，停止編輯，多與他人交流、溝通、瞭解維基百科程序，以免作出擾亂性編輯，也懇請您務必要聽勸。不是阻止您為維基貢獻，只是不要反復執行同一無建設性編輯，尤其是在這麼多熱心人士提醒您的情況下。祝安好。 175.156.214.74 (talk) 17:57, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) What I meant was that no edit that is not minor should be marked as minor and it is clearly stated what is not minor edits. The template above is totally valid as blue have marked way too many edits as minor even when they are not minor. QED237 (talk) 18:01, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, understood. 175.156.214.74 (talk) 18:07, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]