User talk:Civatrope

A belated welcome!
Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Civatrope. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * Editor's index to Wikipedia

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on, consult Questions, or place helpme on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! &mdash; alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:55, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 22:39, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you may be blocked from editing. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 00:45, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Why are neither of you using the article talk page instead of leaving this untraceable chain of templates and warnings across user talk pages?&mdash; alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 01:01, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Antifeminism 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. Binksternet (talk) 03:24, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

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. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:47, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Civatrope, you seem to have broken WP:3RR at Antifeminism. It would be in your best interest to respond at the noticeboard and agree not to revert again until you get a talk page consensus. There may still be time to avoid a block. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 17:05, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring at Antifeminism
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Antifeminism. 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. 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. Here is a [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?&oldid=591230468#User:Civatrope_reported_by_User:EvergreenFir_.28Result:_24_hours.29 permanent link] to the full report of the AN3 case. EdJohnston (talk) 05:38, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

"RE: Please focus on your own actions, and not those of other editors. Kuru" - That would probably be easy to do if certain users were not involved with so many pages and reverting attempts to edit the pages Civatrope (talk) 18:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC).