User talk:66.225.161.37

I think you are misunderstanding the difference between an endorsement (i.e. somebody saying they will vote a certain way) and somebody expressing an opinion about an issue (i.e. somebody saying that the proposal will be good or bad for their particular area of expertise). I am acting in good faith: earlier today I removed the addition of Michael O'Leary as somebody endorsing a yes vote, because he did no such thing. All he did was to endorse one of the policies the SNP have said would be implemented if Scotland becomes independent and they are elected (namely, cutting Air Passenger Duty). For all you or I know, the various retired generals may be in favour of Scottish independence for other reasons. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 16:15, 20 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Please discuss this before editing the page again, otherwise it may be construed as edit warring. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 16:29, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;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&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Please engage on the article talk page and resolve this constructively. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 17:51, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Bundy standoff
I made a copyedit to make a paragraph more readable and concise, and I left out the Utah Territory detail because it didn't seem relevant. You put back Utah Territory because you think it's relevant, which is fine, but you also reverted the rest of my edit. This is a minor issue, and normally I would just restore the minor copyediting while leaving Utah Territory intact, but the article's 1 revert rule forces me to discuss this with you instead. If you have no problem with the rest of my edit, could you please restore it? KinkyLipids (talk) 21:20, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

April 2014
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for Violation of 1RR restrictions on Bundy standoff listed here. 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. Tiptoety talk 22:16, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Why aren't you friendly. 1 revert, 2 reverts. Tiptoety talk 03:04, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * this issue has been taken up on User talk:Tiptoety. 66.225.161.37 (talk) 22:17, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Reductio ad Hitlerum‎, you may be blocked from editing. McGeddon (talk) 09:01, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Reference Errors on 5 May
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:34, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
 * On the Amherstburg page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=607237542 your edit] caused a broken reference name (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F607237542%7CAmherstburg%5D%5D Ask for help])

Original research
Your statement that there is a "derisory amount of land" is unsupported personal opinion. Moreover, you have not provided any source which discusses the amount of land managed by the BLM in the Eastern States in the context of the Bundy standoff - which makes it original synthesis. Unless there is a source which relates the two together, we cannot do so independently. Please refrain from inserting personal opinion, original research and synthesis into Wikipedia articles. Thank you. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 21:21, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * yes, I've sourced your blm page for greater certainty. I was unsurprised to find that you are an "Alaskan Vandal/Government Employee".

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 21:39, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * this issue has been taken up on Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring 66.225.161.37 (talk) 22:16, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment; or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Signature icon.png) located above the edit window.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 22:20, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for violation of 1RR on the same article for a second time. 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. Black Kite (talk) 23:17, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

No, you don't have what you call a "forum" in which other Wikipedians are obliged to respond to anything you wish to post: what you had was an opportunity to address the reasons for the unblock, and to give reasons why the block might be reviewed. It is clear from what you said in your last use of the unblock request template that you knew full well that it was not an unblock request. Moreover, you have explicitly stated that you plan to continue to deliberately misuse the unblock request template. Therefore, in order to prevent you from wasting administrators' time with further phony "unblock requests", your talk page access has been removed for the duration of the block. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 07:36, 13 May 2014 (UTC)