User talk:69.14.4.153
August 2025
[edit]Please don't add original research to articles. It is common for people to believe that they have proved the Riemann hypothesis, but without refereeing and acceptance by the mainstream mathematical community, it means nothing at all.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 15:54, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
- I'm the #1 computer scientist in the world. I'm here to inform you you're operating way out of your league and have absolutely no idea of it. 69.14.4.153 (talk) 15:57, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Riemann hypothesis 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.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:03, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to User talk:David Eppstein, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Aydoh8[what have I done now?] 20:35, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. ♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 14:05, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:01, 10 August 2025 (UTC)- If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.
Riemann hypothesis
[edit]Just because you find yourself in the incredibly unique position of believing you are right and everyone else is wrong does not give you permission to edit war in a vain attempt to force your way around here. Wikipedia doesn't work like that. If you truly believe you are right, then start a discussion at Talk:Riemann hypothesis and gain consensus. Bringing reliable, secondary sources that support your position that it has been solved will go a long way to bringing about that consensus. That's how we work here, not by trying to bludgeon an article into our preferred version and insulting people who disagree with us. I am sure as a highly learned person, you can see the wisdom in this. I'm confident once the block expires you will return and bring a reasoned, rational approach to this issue at Talk:Riemann hypothesis. I look forward to your well sourced commentary. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 16:30, 10 August 2025 (UTC)