User talk:Ellerochelle

August 2012
Your recent editing history at You didn't build that shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you 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. Please consider this a friendly warning to let you know you have reached your limit. Scjessey (talk) 16:16, 30 August 2012 (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. Thank you. MastCell Talk 16:50, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Recommended action
I recommend you "self-revert" your last edit at You didn't build that with an edit summary that explains how you were a new editor that didn't understand the rules. That will probably be looked upon favorably by the administrator reviewing your edit warring case. -- Scjessey (talk) 16:56, 30 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm not going to self-revert because that website was the first source for the fact. All of the major news sources cited to it.  I apologize for reverting instead of going to the Talk page, but I am not changing the edit.  It is verifiable and it uses the best citation for the fact (Daily Dolt).  The Gawker citation you used on the RNC Convention page even recognizes the Daily Dolt as the source of the news. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellerochelle (talk • contribs)


 * You can still self-revert and then make your case on the talk page, but if you don't self-revert you are likely to get blocked by the administrator handling your case. I am not personally involved in your edits, by the way. I just noticed you were edit warring, warned you and then reported you when you kept doing it. -- Scjessey (talk) 17:06, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a short time for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule. 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. Black Kite (talk) 18:30, 30 August 2012 (UTC)