User talk:PieIsAwesome012

I've noticed you have been editing articles on roads in New Jersey and New York lately. I would just like to give you a few reminders. First, please do not add fake junctions to the infobox. Second, make sure to keep the junctions in the list in chronological order from south-to-north and west-to-east. Third, there is a limit of 10 junctions in the infobox, not including the termini of the road. Make sure to include only the most important junctions in an article about a road with a lot of junctions. Fourth, please do not add decommissioned routes to the infoboxes of articles about existing routes. I hope you take this advice and continue to make constructive edits towards the road articles. Dough4872 03:44, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PieIsAwesome, FYI,[1][2][3], given the similarity in these edits, I have to ask, are you aware of any connection between this account and User:RyGuy012? Just so you know wikipedia policy on accounts that appear connected, abandoning one account and starting a new one is ok (see WP:Cleanstart), but editing under two accounts simultaneously is not (see WP:SOCK). Believe it or not, all of us at WP:USRD do want to help new editors succeed, and understand that new editors can make well intentioned mistakes. However, if there is a connection between these accounts, better that be disclosed now. Dave (talk) 14:16, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PieIsAwesome012! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join other new editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from other new editors. These editors have also just begun editing Wikipedia; they may have had similar experiences as you. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from your peers. I hope to see you there! Jtmorgan (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:12, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Fredddie. An edit that you recently made to California State Route 2 seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the 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! –Fredddie™ 01:51, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at U.S. Route 6. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

• 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. 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, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. [4][5][6] Please be more careful, there's a few edits now where formatting has been broken with no effort to repair it. Dave (talk) 20:54, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to New York State Thruway may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:19, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to U.S. Route 6, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. –Fredddie™ 03:57, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited U.S. Route 6 in New York, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Woodbury, New York. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:19, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Interstate 80. I strongly encourage you to visit WT:USRD and discuss your intentions and edits there. We've tried to be patient, but that is wearing thin. Dave (talk) 02:48, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistent disruptive editing, as you did at [[:Interstate 90]]. 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.  Dave (talk) 05:20, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Interstate 87, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Albany and Chester, New York. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:40, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]