User talk:Constance Markey

June 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Italo Calvino has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Alansohn (talk) 02:40, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Remember what I said on your previous two accounts: Don't put your comments and discussion into the article, but explain clearly what you think should be changed, and why, and what Wikipedia guideline you think supports your desired edit, on the talk page. The section you're objecting to is simply the sources various people have used while writing the article; you don't really want to remove all of those sources from the article, leaving it uncited, do you?  As an academic, I know you understand the importance of sources. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:49, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It's very important that you stop, and try to understand my messages to you. You have fundamentally misunderstood the section to which you object.


 * It is not a complete bibliography related to Calvino. It is simply a list of sources that were used by the people who wrote this article.
 * It cannot be removed, because Wikipedia editors are required to cite the sources of information that they use.
 * Discussion about an article goes on the talk page. We don't put discussion in the body of an article.
 * If you have questions about that, you can ask me here.
 * If you continue editing Italo Calvino in this unhelpful way, I will have to block you from editing until you reach a fuller understanding of what kinds of edits would be helpful. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:57, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Final warning
The next time you add the inappropriate comment to Italo Calvino, I will block you from editing Wikipedia. I understand that your edits aren't intended to be harmful, and that you are only confused, but you are disrupting the encyclopedia, and it is time to stop and try to understand what the reference list is. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:58, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text  below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Except that I am a Calvino scholar and YOU are wrong!! The refernce list is wrong!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Constance Markey (talk • contribs)
 * If you are a scholar, you know how to have a reasonable conversation. I'm deeply annoyed that you refused to converse with anyone until after you were blocked, and now, you still won't explain yourself clearly, but I'm willing to try to understand you if you'll try to understand me.  What, exactly, is wrong with the list of the sources that other editors used for their information? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 03:15, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It's late, and I'm going to bed, so don't look for an immediate reply from me- but I looked up your name, I recognize that you are a legitimate scholar in this area, and I'd like to help you learn Wikipedia's writing style, so you can help us make this article better- there's certainly room for improvement in it, if helping improve it is something you're interested in doing. I'll check back on this page tomorrow to see if you're interested in letting me help. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 03:23, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Welcome back
In this edit, you're continuing to blank the reference section. You call that section "the footnotes to some anonymous article," but they are the footnotes to this article, the Wikipedia article that you are looking at! I hoped in our last encounter that you would choose to discuss what you're trying to do; I know you don't really mean to remove all the footnotes from the Wikipedia article, so I have to assume that you're misunderstanding something. Please don't remove anything more from the article until you have discussed what you are doing with other users, and reached a consensus; I still don't understand from your edit summaries what you believe you are achieving by blanking all the footnotes from Wikipedia's article about Italo Calvino. I would feel badly if I had to block you again, but I do feel like I've explained myself as clearly as I can, and I'm hurt that you haven't chosen to respond to my messages in any way. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 18:42, 4 July 2009 (UTC)