User talk:69.116.155.79

June 2017
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974 film). Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you.  The Old Jacobite  The '45  01:23, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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 notice boards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

I don't care because the plot section repeated the "The Mayor agrees to pay the ransom" twice as well as a few minor edit errors and yet you still act like you own the article and the whole website in general. 69.116.155.79 (talk) 23:36, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Please stop making disruptive edits, as you did at The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974 film). If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing.  The Old Jacobite  The '45  23:51, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 * 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 notice boards.
 * 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 this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors.  The Old Jacobite  The '45  23:51, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 16:17, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on 5 (New York City Subway service). Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. 331dot (talk) 16:28, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Talkback
331dot (talk) 21:09, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 22:30, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive behaviour. It appears you are purposefully harassing another editor. Wikipedia aims to provide a safe environment for its collaborators, and harassing other users, as you did on User talk:LRG5784, potentially compromises that safe environment. If you continue behaving like this, you may be blocked from editing. 331dot (talk) 10:08, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

As for "two little insults"; be aware that any amount of insults is not permitted. 331dot (talk) 10:10, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Blah blah blah. Yawn. Moving on. Like I care. 69.116.155.79 (talk) 10:13, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you purposefully and blatantly harass a fellow Wikipedian, as you did at User talk:LRG5784. 331dot (talk) 13:08, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

I've reported this activity. LRG has made it clear they don't wish to communicate with you. 331dot (talk) 13:40, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Okay, snitch. 69.116.155.79 (talk) 13:41, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

You're gonna get blocked too anyway since you also violated the 3-revert rule thingy just now. 69.116.155.79 (talk) 13:42, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * As stated at WP:3RR: "Reverting vandalism is not edit warring" 331dot (talk) 13:44, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for persistent vandalism. 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 request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. Widr (talk) 13:42, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 6 months for abuse of editing privileges. 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 request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:.

Congratulations, you've been blocked again. Was it really worth it? Maybe you'll have an answer when your block expires...next year. See you in 2018. —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 22:10, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Seriously?
Was it really worth it? Did you get a kick out of harassing me the way you did on my talk page? Look where it got you now. Have fun with your year-Long Wikipedia jail sentence. Goodbye —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 17:00, 17 February 2018 (UTC)