User talk:JayR1977

July 2013
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. eg this. TippyGoomba (talk) 15:22, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.


 * This is inappropriate, I gave a reason for the tag participating in the talk page and I was reverted by another editor who did not even bother to discuss in the talk page and you did not even read what I wrote. You should encourage editors who believe in dialogue and follow the guidelines and not try to threaten them with inappropriate templates - this is not the spirit of wiki. I believe. --JayR1977 (talk) 09:54, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * This is a template for edit warring, you edit warred ergo someone templated you. It's a necessary aspect of dispute resolution to inform people who are breaking the rules that they are breaking the rules.  To reiterate point #2: it doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, edit warring is always inappropriate (with the exceptions of vandalism and BLP violations).   N o f o rmation  Talk  23:19, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Really? Who is breaking the rules - the editors who participate in the talk page and use tags appropriately or the ones who just "guard" the articles, vote and they never participate in the discussion ? Your sensitivity is really selective though - did you see that someone called me an idiot and no one cared to say anything ? apparently they are double standards of behavior depending on your point of view. So the rules appear to be intellectual garbage. --JayR1977 (talk) 15:16, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I can see exactly where you are coming from. Try to stay calm and don't get blocked or banned.  I'm not a homeopath but do occasionally take homepathic remedies and have some confidence in them.  However I have a passion for neutrality and balance and I think we may be up against an insoluble flaw in wikipedia. Sceptic1954 (talk) 19:53, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Sock puppetry
I notice that you have begun to edit from a dynamic IP which changes, and now you have used several. That creates a situation where you are in violation of our prohibition against sockpuppetry. The best solution is to always log in to your registered account. Please follow this advice to avoid being blocked. -- Brangifer (talk) 03:56, 7 September 2013 (UTC)


 * It looks like this goes much further back as Category:Suspected Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_79.180.48.58. Pushing a fringe agenda is a serious matter. That alone can get you into trouble, but I'd like to see you given a chance. The biggest problem right now is your use of multiple accounts. That MUST stop. I suggest you just stick to this one, or if you have another registered account, use it and declare this one dead. Just choose the ONE you wish to use and stop using IPs. -- Brangifer (talk) 04:20, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Not sock puppetry
Jay, I have removed the suspected sockpuppetry template that was placed on your user page, and on behalf of most WP editors would like to apologize for the warning here. The information that you were given is NOT Wikipedia policy. Unfortunately, we have some who do not understand that editing from IPs is not forbidden, nor even a problem. I hope that you will stay at WP. Regards, GregJackP   Boomer!   05:15, 25 September 2013 (UTC)