User talk:Chuteboxestomps

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Yukikondo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Yukikondo.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 11:58, 13 December 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:58, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Wanderlei Silva
Hello, I thought I'd leave a message for you as you seem to be engaged in an edit war with Dachknanddarice on the Wanderlei Silva over the inclusion of flag icons in MMA records tables. Currently the Wikipedia-wide consensus is that they should not be included as per the Manual of Style guidelines at WP:MOSFLAG. Further the consensus at the MMA project page agrees with the guideline as a result of discussions at WT:MMA which you can read here. If you disagree with the consensus view you are welcome to take part in the discussion and try to change that view. In the meantime please do not add flag icons to record boxes as it goes against Wikipedia consensus and the MMA project consensus. If you have any questions or comments you can reach me at my talk page. Thanks. SQGibbon (talk) 22:10, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello, the discussion at the MMA Talk page is still going on in case you wish to participate. Engaging in discussion is always more productive than just edit warring (of which I'm also guilty of).  Wikipedia is a community of editors all with different ideas and approaches, it is imperative that we be able to discuss our different views and reach a consensus view or else everything falls apart into people reverting each out of spite with no concern for improving the quality of Wikipedia.  So again, please engage in the discussion and let's all try to get this issue worked out to everyone's satisfaction. SQGibbon (talk) 22:13, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Article edit war
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.--Razionale (talk) 23:23, 29 April 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.


 * You have now reverted five times. As a result, I have reported you for edit warring. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 00:03, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

April 2011
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring by violation of the three-revert rule&#32;at Wanderlei Silva. 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 would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Courcelles 00:19, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:22, 24 November 2015 (UTC)