User talk:89.226.117.72

Welcome

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:


 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

You are welcome to continue editing articles without logging in, but you may wish to  [ create an account] . Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits. If you edit without a username, your IP address is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question and then place  before the question on this page. Again, welcome! --  Darth Mike   ( Talk  • Contribs ) 10:49, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

July 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Glans penis has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Calabe1992 (talk) 17:36, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Glans penis with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Calabe1992 (talk) 17:46, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Please stop
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:89.226.117.72, you may be blocked from editing. NHRHS2010 the student pilot  ✈  17:48, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Please refrain from abusing warning or blocking templates. Doing so is a violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Calabe1992 (talk) 17:50, 21 July 2011 (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.

Final warning
This is your last warning; the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Glans penis, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. NHRHS2010 the student pilot  ✈  17:53, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively. In particular, the three-revert rule states that: 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 continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Calabe1992 (talk) 17:53, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
 * 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.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Glans penis. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively. In particular, the three-revert rule states that: 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 continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Please also note that per WP:BLANKING, deletion of a warning message is considered proof of having read that message. Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 17:56, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
 * 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.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. If you have a registered Wikipedia username, you may log in and continue to edit. Otherwise, once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text, but 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.  ·Add§hore·  T alk T o M e ! 18:04, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
10:59, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree with your suggestion that we get input from more editors, so I went ahead and opened an RFC regarding the image selection. It's on the article Talk page.  Cheers...   16:09, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Returning image selection at Circumcision to consenus before your change while RFC is open
Hello 89.226.117.72, I wanted to inform you that I am returning the image selection at Circumcision to what it was before your proposed change while the image selection RFC is open. You and I both agree that an appropriate image could improve the article, but we do not agree on which is the best image to improve the article, and so we agreed to get input from a wider group of editors. That is why I have opened the RFC and we are already getting comments. I am assuming good faith here that your intention is to improve the article in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines, and that you will be working alongside your fellow editors like myself within the Wikipedia core policy of consensus. Right now at the article talk page, there are three editors who are not on board with the proposal that the image you are suggesting is an improvement to the article: Garycompugeek, Doc James and myself. According to WP:CONSENSUS, which is policy, a lack of consensus to support a proposed change like this means that the proposed change should be undone. This is the reason for my revert. It may be that as a result of the RFC, there will be Wikipedia policy- and guideline-based support for the image, in which case I will abide by consensus. Let's let the RFC run its course before acting on any change. I am writing this because I can see from your Talk page here that you have run into difficulty working with other editors within Wikipedia, and you have been blocked for it. Please use this as an opportunity to demonstrate that my assumption of good faith is not misplaced in you, and that you now understand how to work with your fellow editors within consensus--if not, there are administrators who can help ensure edit-warring policy is adhered to. 19:09, 13 July 2012 (UTC)