User talk:187.47.23.230

3RR
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 17:44, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

February 2010
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule&#32;at Talk:Mark Weisbrot. 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 believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Andy Walsh  (talk)  17:58, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.


 * No, actually you've shown that you're perfectly willing to edit war first and discuss later. You are also sockpuppeting; no random anonymous user has such a thorough knowledge of Wikipedia's internal processes. It's a moot block anyway, since you're clearly capable of switching IP addresses whenever it's convenient. You'd make discussion a lot easier if you would stick to one user account. Logging out and using multiple accounts to create the impression of support for your position is a violation of policy, as I'm sure you know. -- Andy Walsh  (talk)  18:51, 15 February 2010 (UTC)