User talk:Dagousset

April 2014
Your recent editing history at Energy Catalyzer 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. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:45, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Good talkpage practice
Dagousset, you have responded on Talk:Energy Catalyzer as if you hadn't read or hadn't understood AndyTheGrump's post to you, where he carefully and civilly explained that the problem was not with the source. Please keep your talkpage posts responsive, and stay polite: less of the "who are you", please. "Comment on content, not on the contributor" is Wikipedia policy. (I see you thought better of the second part of your post and removed it. That was a good idea.) And, indeed, as Andy says above, stop edit warring on the article, as that is also against policy. Please read the warning above carefully, it's very informative. Bishonen &#124; talk 21:23, 8 April 2014 (UTC).

"Who are you" just means "what are your competence on this subject" not "what kind of idiot/disinformer are you".

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. Thank you. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:30, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring, as you did at Energy Catalyzer. I have also blocked the IP you were using for the same edit warring. I'm assuming that you were editing logged out by accident, but please be very careful about staying logged in when you're repeatedly reverting. It might look like it was two people reverting, instead of just you, which makes it more difficult for administrators to see what's going on. But, as I said, I assume you weren't deliberately trying to confuse. 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. Bishonen &#124; talk 21:00, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

P. S. Dagousset, I've taken a look at your latest comments on article talk (where you also use both your account an your IP by turns — please don't). If you keep on accusing editors of vandalism and of some shady ulterior motives when you return from the block, I will block you for making personal attacks. Please read the policies No personal attacks and Assume good faith. They're two very central policies for everybody who wants to edit here. Please keep discussion civil. Bishonen &#124; talk 21:19, 10 April 2014 (UTC).