User talk:IP IP Hurra!

Welcome!

 * } -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 11:20, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

August 2010
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Marco Polo's birthplace. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Dougweller (talk) 09:11, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Marco Polo. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive' 15:41, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Marco Polo, you may be blocked from editing.  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive' 15:58, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: I've asked the reasons of the two above warnings, that I consider injustfied.--IP IP Hurra! (talk) 16:14, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: Marco Polo
You have been warned about edit warring already on one article, I suggest you not begin edit warring in another article. I have seen the talk page discussion, and you do not have consensus for your changes. Stop removing cited information. ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive' 16:15, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

note To properly understand aboove comments by Republican read here:
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RepublicanJacobite&diff=prev&oldid=380340262
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RepublicanJacobite&diff=prev&oldid=380340262
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RepublicanJacobite&diff=prev&oldid=380341411]
 * --IP IP Hurra! (talk) 17:04, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Disregard that, he sucks! 66.25.190.53 (talk) 16:58, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, IP IP Hurra!, you might want to read Tendentious editing. I don't have anything against you and I recognise that you feel passionate about the argument and that you have provided some excellent sources, but please note that unless you change your tack you might find yourself banned from the topic. Brutal Deluxe (talk) 18:57, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi. Now I am not happy with the way you counter others in a debate. A compromise has just been suggested, try to act in a constructive manner. --Tone 17:52, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Attack
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for attempting to harass other users. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. After your Single purpose editing, your warnings and your victimisation of an editor who has been in a long term conflict with various IP socks, along with your name implying that you are those IPs I am convinced your are only here to disrupt wikipedia and am blocking you indefinitely. This edit giving a flower and refering to an editor's mother using Italian is particularly nasty based on my knowledge of the history of the conflict in this area. This sort of nonsense should be given no second chances and has no place on wikipedia. While I am outlining these issues you are almost certainly a sock per WP:DUCK. Polargeo (talk) 15:16, 27 August 2010 (UTC)