User talk:Equalizerbis

March 2015
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Politecnico di Studi Aziendali, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. VeryCrocker (talk) 10:41, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

the information is inaccurate and false, incomplete and omission. References are defamatory and does not come from bodies. Gets no reference to the new federal law came into force January 1, 2015 governing the accreditation as a simple mark of quality and only from 2023.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Politecnico di Studi Aziendali, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Valenciano (talk) 10:53, 10 March 2015 (UTC) the information is inaccurate and false, incomplete and omission. References are defamatory and does not come from bodies. Gets no reference to the new federal law came into force January 1, 2015 governing the accreditation as a simple mark of quality and only from 2023.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Politecnico di Studi Aziendali. Valenciano (talk) 10:56, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Blanking
If you disagree with the content of the article, please use the article's talk page to suggest changes or corrections. Blanking all the content will simply result in your account being blocked. Valenciano (talk) 10:57, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. 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. JohnCD (talk) 11:06, 10 March 2015 (UTC)


 * It appears you have used sockpuppets to continue the talkpage discussin while blocked. As this is block evasion, I have extended the block to a week. -- Euryalus (talk) 11:41, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

ANI
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Possible legal threat at Politecnico di Studi Aziendali. Thank you. --VeryCrocker (talk) 10:09, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

March 2015
This account appears to have been involved with the sockpuppetry investigation at Sockpuppet investigations/Isseasa. If you are in fact the same user as — a username which has already been blocked for violation of our username policy — you may be able to resume editing if you pick a new username (one that is uniquely yours and does not imply that you are acting on behalf of the Politecnico di Studi Aziendali), and if you are careful to abide by all Wikipedia editing policies (including refraining from edit warring or legal threats). — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 06:56, 25 March 2015 (UTC)