User talk:GansuKing

December 2012
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Ma Bufang, 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. Shrigley (talk) 05:42, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

December 2015
Hello, I'm Eteethan. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Ma Bufang with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.  Ete ethan  (talk)  17:44, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Ma Bufang with this edit, 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.  Ete ethan  (talk)  17:51, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing. Your sole edits to Wikipedia have been to push your point of view at Ma Bufang. Should you wish to edit constructively you can request an unblock that explains how you will edit collaboratively. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 23:05, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

This is to Eteethan & Ponyo, Your messege and reason is not specific. The deleted part have no concrete refrenced. To Ponyo, By your block, it mean you support providing Wikipedia with inaccurate information and sometimes there are no references at all. The accuracy of the reference must be valid. These are not my openion. It is facts. GansuKing lk:GansuKing#top|talk]]) 08:46, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Dear Ponyo,

It is clearly you haven't utilize Wikipedia procedure regarding block as per the following action per Wikipedia rules: " If the tendentious editor is using sources, but if the sources are poor or misinterpreted: Do not go to ANI yet. Review Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. File a report at the Reliable Sources noticeboard, if appropriate. Continue attempts to engage the editor in dialogue. Refer to policies and guidelines as appropriate. If only two editors are involved, seek a Third Opinion. If more editors are involved, try a Request for comment." you didn't do any of the above. Please advise how you use your authority of blocking editors? GansuKing (talk) 10:09, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Therefore, Ponyo your block action is Against Wikipedia procedure of Dealing with disruptive editors. GansuKing (talk) 10:13, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Dear Ponyo, We request to remove your block ASAP. In addition, Before you block any editor, Please follow procedure of Wikipedia and ensure yours adhere to the rules. We are not only here to build Wikipedia. But to provide strong info with many valid references. In conclusion, It is your call, but next time I suggest you read the reference before you do a block. GansuKing (talk) 10:43, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Dear Eteethan &Ponyo, kindly advise regarding the above. SincerelyGansuKing (talk) 10:56, 11 December 2015 (UTC) GansuKing (talk) 10:56, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

GansuKing (talk) 19:42, 11 December 2015