University of Management and Technology[edit]

Please familiarize yourself Wikipedia's basic editing guidelines and policies. Your edit on the UMT page in addition to your editing history strongly suggests that you have a conflict of interest with the article as the changes you made in the Mission Statement, Authorizations, Academics and Academic Orientation and Project Management Leadership sections are wholly of a promotional nature that were either unsourced or drew on either irrelevant or self-published sources - in clear contravention of WP:NOTADVOCACY. Even if you do not have a conflict of interest , the material still clearly violates Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (the way you wrote the controversy section). I would strongly suggest that you take the time to go through the rules first before you make any further changes to the article. Flickotown (talk) 05:18, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Warning Stop restoring your controversial material as you did here. Your edits clearly violate Wikipedia's editing guidelines and policies as I have already been explained to you above. We can discuss the issues either here on your talk page or on the article talk page, but again do not revert the article again. Please consider this my final warning to you on this matter to try and resolve this informally before we escalate it and involve the authorities. Flickotown (talk) 02:55, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Coordinated editing attack on University of Management and Technology (United States). ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 13:07, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at University of Management and Technology (United States). Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. ——SerialNumber54129 16:53, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 19:22, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]