User talk:70.112.44.202

November 2017
Hello, I'm Tompop888. I noticed that you made a comment on the page User talk:Sergecross73 that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Tompop888 (talk) (contribs) 17:50, 7 November 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.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Ristar. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted. Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 17:51, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Ristar was changed by 70.112.44.202 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.929522 on 2017-11-07T17:51:38+00:00.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. G M G talk   17:53, 7 November 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.

June 2018
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

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.

''You've made your change 3 times now, while there's clearly no WP:CONSENSUS on the talk page. WP:BRD and consensus doesn't say "start a talk page discussion and then revert over and over again". If you are challenged once, you're supposed to stop, discuss, and only make the change again if there is a clear consensus to move forward. We do not have that, so stop making your change. Sergecross73  msg me  02:30, 2 June 2018 (UTC)''

Whatever, I give up. It's not possible to get a consensus because it require myself and two others simultaneously to care. There have been at least three or four others who said the same as I did, but the consensus of solely you and Dissident matters more. And it always will. I guess years ago you stop erroneously pushing this idea that Yuji Naka worked on this game. You should just ban me from the article so I can stop caring and fighting this pointless battle because I now know because of you why wikipedia isn't really a thing by the people, it can be pushed to say what it wants to say by certain admins just screaming over and over that whatever source they have is the best source even if it is lesser. So thanks for the disappointment I guess. I'll revert again, so ban me.
 * Faking a "I give up" while continuing to revert will just get you blocked all the same. Sergecross73   msg me  02:44, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

It's the same as it's always been, it's directly arguing with you and Dissident93 or there would be no issue, so yeah, I give up.
 * In what capacity are you giving up? Because you're still reverting on the article and still ranting on the talk page? Sergecross73   msg me  02:53, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Because you asked questions, I will still respond, however it will not go anywhere because ultimately you are the one who has the say, because Wikipedia is run by admins.
 * None of that addresses your continued reverts or arguing. It's literally not "giving up" if you're still doing both. Don't make misleading comments to avoid scrutiny. Sergecross73   msg me  03:06, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for edit warring. 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 think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. -- ferret (talk) 12:31, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.