Hello, Xpenz, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Your first article
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
• Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
• and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

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 need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place ((Help me)) on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Pabsoluterince (talk) 14:15, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is really appreciated! CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 00:25, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. StellarNerd (talk) 20:00, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest are you high? Xpenz (talk) 21:27, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have modified the Inspiration4 article to remove the space tourism wording since the astronauts are commercial astronauts but I have been quickly reverted. I do not want to go into a debate so I will not edit further. But the editor seems strongly opinionated about this. Hektor (talk) 16:42, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Inspiration4 is not space tourism, since they did science and other stuff.. Blue origin and virgin galactic which are suborbital flights would probably qualify as space tourisms. Xpenz (talk) 16:49, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@StellarNerd Xpenz (talk) 17:51, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Doing make believe inconsequential experiments while playing dress up as astronauts does not qualify as science. For PR they presented themselves as "astronauts", "on a mission", and "doing science". The whole flight was PR from start to finish. --StellarNerd (talk) 19:35, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's your opinion, and you did not get consensus before you started your disruptive editing, and then you accuse me with some sort of conspiracy theory, that I'm somehow involved with SpaceX. @Hawkeye7 also made it clear they do qualify as Commercial astronauts Xpenz (talk) 20:43, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Xpenz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Because I saw you are working on spaceflight-related articles, I thought the general intro, spaceflight collaboration and the Constellation program pages would be helpful to you. Happy editing! StarshipSLS (Talk), (My Contributions) 00:14, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• 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, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• 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.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Tesla Autopilot, you may be blocked from editing. Please stop fostering an edit war and rather explain why your edits are required on the Talk page if you feel so strongly about them. QRep2020 (talk) 00:45, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no disruptive editing, in fact you're the one with the biased editing. You have been banned before and you're going on that path again it seems. @QRep2020 Xpenz (talk) 00:50, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps give WP:NPA a read. QRep2020 (talk) 00:55, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You don't come in here and threaten me. Maybe you read that yourself. @QRep2020 Xpenz (talk) 01:09, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Threaten you? Where did I threaten you? The non-italicized text is the formal warning language used by the Twinkle tool. QRep2020 (talk) 01:24, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Call it what you want, the fact that you reacted this way to some of my totally fair edits, says alot. And definitely going to be watching your edits in the future. @QRep2020 Xpenz (talk) 01:31, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Have fun. QRep2020 (talk) 01:48, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Get lost @QRep2020 Xpenz (talk) 12:37, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Tesla Autopilot 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. StellarNerd (talk) 20:11, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Undoing another editor's work" did not happen, as long as you keep deleting my edits I'll keep re adding it. @StellarNerd Xpenz (talk) 20:14, 20 June 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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Xpenz reported by User:StellarNerd (Result: ). Thank you. StellarNerd (talk) 20:34, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@StellarNerd You need to stop with your harassment already. Xpenz (talk) 20:37, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring, as you did at Tesla Autopilot. 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 ~~~~)).  Bbb23 (talk) 22:41, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Warbayx per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Warbayx. 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 ~~~~)).  Girth Summit _(blether) 08:30, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]