User talk:25162995

User talk:Johnsy88/Archive 1

Edit warring at Amanda Knox
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring, as you did at Amanda Knox. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. 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. The full report of this case is at the 3RR noticeboard. EdJohnston (talk) 02:01, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

You were edit-warring. Read this link: Edit warring. That is pretty black-and-white verifiable fact.

Oh, and proclaiming that you'll continue edit-warring when your block expires pretty much guarantees that said block will become permanent, so I'd rethink that statement if I were you: blocks are not punitive, but preventative, and this would be a textbook case for an indefinite one. --Calton | Talk 16:57, 6 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I never once said i would continue edit warring. I said i would revert if i saw it as WP:NOT3R which is exactly what this case is. Evidently you and other admins care only about trivial edit wars and not the exact ins and outs of this case which shows an extreme example of why people may distrust WK in general or be put off from actually editing. 25162995 (talk) 17:15, 6 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Edit-warring to force your version when multiple editors disagree with you will not help. You'll end up blocked and lose any chance to further make your points.  You're in a dispute and there are better ways to try and resolve it.  You've got a couple of noticeboards that might help (WP:BLPN and WP:NPOVN are the two most likely).  Also read through the various dispute resolution options.  After your block expires, please don't try to force your version into the article.  Yes, be WP:BOLD, but you also need to discuss.  WP:BRD, remember?  Bold change that gets Reverted means Discussion. Ravensfire ( talk ) 17:28, 6 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Its not "my version" its a citated verifiable fact in black and white which admins clearly ignore. 25162995 (talk) 17:30, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Buffaboy. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Björk because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Buffaboy talk 20:55, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2015
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Buffaboy talk 20:56, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)