Please review before continuing to fight vandalism ==  Recently, you placed several warnings on user talk pages that did not make sense. See . You claimed that all of these were automatic, and you had nominated them for deletion due to creating multiple redirects: .  Redirects are WP:CHEAP, and creating many plausible redirects is perfectly acceptable. In fact, it's desirable, as it aids in navigating the wiki. You nominated these for speedy deletion as per WP:G3, which is for obvious vandalism. You may wish to review what vandalism is and is not at WP:VANDALISM, as creating plausible redirects certainly is not vandalism. Unless someone intends to damage the wiki purposefully, it is not vandalism. Without an intent to do harm, it is at most disruptive editing. In this case, it was neither, as redirects are explicitly for plausible search terms.  When nominating articles for deletion, there is a check box in Twinkle that you can uncheck to not send a notice when placing a deletion nomination. Most of the time this should be checked, but when nominating multiple articles from the same author with the same reason, it is better to send one notice and then manually write a note to them saying that the notice also includes the other pages. Leaving duplicate notices on their page may overwhelm well-meaning editors, and can be a form of biting. Additionally, the last warning you placed as a final warning for vandalism was entirely unwarranted. The level 4 warnings should only be used after multiple previous warnings have been given or in situations that are particularly egregious (such as obvious vandalism that is clearly intentional, causes serious damage, and spans many articles before being caught). This is not a warning that can be placed automatically, so you had to have pressed several buttons to place it using Twinkle.  Please be more careful when placing warning templates. Misusing warning templates can drive away good editors or editors who have good intentions but just need some help to be productive. A new editor who mistakenly receives a level 4 warning will almost never come back to the wiki, and so placing unwarranted warnings can be disruptive. I do not doubt your good intentions, but if you drive away even a handful of good editors while reverting vandalism, the overall effect may well be a net negative.  Before continuing to patrol new pages and revert vandalism, please review what vandalism is, the criteria for speedy deletion, our guideline on biting newcomers, and consider enrolling in the Counter-Vandalism Unit Academy for further training on how to deal with vandalism. I definitely welcome your contributions to the project, but this is an area where speed doesn't matter and accuracy is very important. Taking a few hours or even a week or more to learn how to effectively fight vandalism will result in you being a better editor and more able to contribute to the project. Thanks for reading this, and if you have any questions about anything (either this message or any policy, etc), feel free to respond here or on my talk page. ~     == 