User talk:Clumpytree

RM
WP:RM, good luck. - dwc lr (talk) 14:14, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No the current titles are correct according to English language usage. I'm sorry you are so sensitive to royal titles but English language sources use them, that is a simple fact. - dwc lr (talk) 14:20, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I strongly encourage you to write titles are not reconsigned in Germany. But what you are doing in calling people by names that they are never known as in English to suit your anti royal POV. Ludwig Rudolph Prinz von Hannover, Ludwig Rudolf Prinz von Hannover, both nothing. Prince Ludwig Rudolph of Hanover, Prince Ludwig Rudolf of Hanover, both something. Princess Ortrud, something, Ortrud Prinzessin, nothing. I suggest you revert yourself as it reflects very badly on you pushing a POV. - dwc lr (talk) 14:37, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

I am making the article conform to a NPOV, by mentioning titles and a footnote on legal name, what is your problem with this. In English titles are attributed to them. - dwc lr (talk) 01:14, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

You are clearly editing from a POV as one can see from your user page. If you don't have respect for Wikipedia policy of a NPOV you should stop editing, its as simple as that. This is not the place for you come and impose your own personal view. If you don't change your attitude you will probably end up getting blocked for disruptive editing. I suggest you stop and think before you revert again, the Hanover's are known by titles that is a simple verifiable fact. - dwc lr (talk) 01:27, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

May 2011
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.. - dwc lr (talk) 01:56, 12 May 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. - dwc lr (talk) 02:55, 12 May 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.

As you have reverted more than 3 times in 24 hours, you should probably revert yourself otherwise you could get blocked. - dwc lr (talk) 03:02, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Legal names
Could you supply a reliable source for the German legal names of the Hanover princes. As you mentioned at the requested move the surname could be Prinz von Hannover or Prinz von Hannover Herzog zu Braunschweig-Lüneburg so really we need to back this up with a reliable source, otherwise it would constitute WP:OR. - dwc lr (talk) 16:27, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Requesting your comment concerning a consensus here
Hello, as you are involved with the Prince Ernst August of Hanover (born 1954) article, would you like to comment on a proposed resolution of the issues concerning the article? If so, please visit the Talk:Prince_Ernst_August_of_Hanover_(born_1954). Thank you. - SudoGhost 18:49, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Please unblock me
Comment on the last unblock rejection: "entirely of disruption, including repeated edit warring, incivility, and in at least one case, outright vandalism [1]" - I have discussed those points in my previous unblock request. As said, I apologised for the one occurence of vandalism and have reverted it myself. I have kept to the edit warring rules as soon as I was alerted to them, and my edits were not disruptive but mainly became the consensus of a highly controversial topic. "employee or representative of the Wikimedia Foundation" - I know that most work on the Wikipedia is not done by employees by the Wikimedia Foundation, but they are ultimately responsible and given my experience with their product I will object whenever I hear them or anyone claim that the Wikipedia is about truth and wide participation. I am clearly not allowed to participate. I was blocked because I objected to plainly wrong assertions. "I see nothing in this request to indicate we could expect anything different on another go of it." - It is true I have a controversial style and I won't bent over and apologise for asking for fair treatment, but as also discussed before I learn and am willing to keep to the rules. I still think it is strange that each time I ask to be unblocked new different reasons are given to reject it, that have nothing to do anymore with why I was initally blocked. Best wishes, Clumpytree (talk) 11:07, 11 December 2012 (UTC)