Hello, Scimernet, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! --MollyPollyRolly (talk) 06:20, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please obtain consensus on the article talk page or go through the requested moves process before changing the naming scheme on any further firearm cartridge articles. You will need to provide reliable sources showing that the naming without the starting full stop/period is actually the industry standard, as almost all of the sources currently cited on those pages use the current naming scheme with the starting period. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask on my user talk page or at the Teahouse. Thank you for your contributions! --Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 02:07, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

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 and 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. Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 21:57, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on .50 BMG. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

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 and 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. Your changes to the names across ammunition articles have been challenged multiple times, by multiple people. Please do not make them again without gaining consensus on a talk page first. Loafiewa (talk) 18:20, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to User talk:Loafiewa while logged out. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting and doing so may result in your account being blocked from editing. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. Loafiewa (talk) 18:50, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for 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. Chaheel Riens (talk) 15:50, 5 April 2022 (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. Thank you. Loafiewa (talk) 15:36, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours 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 read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Per a complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. EdJohnston (talk) 02:40, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for resuming the same edit war after a previous block. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.  HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:24, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Loafiewa (talk) 16:40, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have previously been blocked twice for edit warring around the issue of the leading decimal on ammunition calibers. Now you are spamming the same comments regarding this issue on multiple article talk pages, as seen here, here, and here (with many more examples available). Per Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines, "Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views on a subject." Because you were not specifically warned before about posting the same comment across multiple talk pages, I am giving you a final warning to stop this. If you don't stop, in light of the two previous bans you will receive a long-term ban from this site.--SouthernNights (talk) 17:02, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the discussion at WP:ANI so thought I would post this here as it's more about content than anything else. You have indicated that SAAMI is https://saami.org is your best reliable reference. And you suggested that editors read the SAAMI definition of calibre. I did, and it says that calibre is often expressed in hundredths of an inch (“.38 Caliber”) or millimeters (“7mm Caliber). I have not seen the " used with mm before. Their document at Sporting Firarms also has ".22 caliber" and ".30-06" I did notice that at Sporting Ammunition and the Firefighter they use "50 caliber". So SAAMI are not consistent, not unusual for a source. Given that your preferred source uses both systems you need to stop your crusade. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 19:44, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruption, namely tendentious editing and an inability to drop the stick.

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 ~~~~}}.   Salvio 19:28, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]