User talk:Jb782

Welcome!

 * }

July 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page DontDateHimGirl.com has been reverted. Your edit here to DontDateHimGirl.com was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWlWILo9BXtVQ) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 21:06, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit warring at DontDateHimGirl.com
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on DontDateHimGirl.com. 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. In particular, 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 continue edit warring, you may be blocked from editing. - SudoGhost 22:05, 30 July 2011 (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.

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 22:19, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! I did not know how to do it. --Jb782 (talk) 22:20, 30 July 2011 (UTC)Jb782

WP:3RRNB
Please note that you have been reported for edit warring here. Thank you. - SudoGhost 22:47, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * As you continued to edit war after I removed the edit warring report, I have restored it and added the additional information of your continued edit warring. - SudoGhost 23:48, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 8 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring by violation of the three-revert rule&#32;at DontDateHimGirl.com. 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. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:57, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Right, all I did was add sources to my edits. That's edit warring? Doing exactly what you said to do? --Jb782 (talk) 00:04, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Since you asked, no, that's not all you did. This was undoing this edit, which was doing more than adding a source to your statement, it was reinserting material that was removed, without making any attempt to discuss the edit or gain a consensus for the material beforehand. - SudoGhost 00:11, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


 * In fact, the reinsertion of this material after it had already been removed once was what had me decided on a block. Because it was different content, I kept the block short - reduced from the standard of 24 hours to 8 hours - because you may have made the edit by mistake and/or not realized that 3RR pertains to all reversions, even of different content, although it says that in the automated warning above. Was that a mistake on your part? Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:13, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Magog, Yes, it was a mistake. I am new here and did not know about the rule. Then I was attacked and threatened by SudoGhost. He said if I didn't undo my last edit, he would keep the false editing war report up. I have a screenshot of the statement. Then after he realized he was threatening me (after I had said numerous times that I was new here), he deleted the comment because he said it sounded like blackmail, which is exactly how I took it. Thanks for reading through everything and for your understanding. I didn't even know that I had to sign my name to each edit until SineBot pointed it out to me, which I was very grateful for. Thanks!--Jb782 (talk) 14:07, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It was not a false edit warring report, as you were blocked for violating it. Accusing me of personal attacks without merit is considered a personal attack, do not do so without proof.  The diff is available for everyone to see.  I tried to get you to revert the edit so that you would not be blocked, so that you could discuss on the talk page instead of being blocked.  However, I then figured it would be better if I took it upon myself to try to start collaboration on the articles talk page, so I retracted that statement and removed the 3RR report so that you would not be blocked, but asking you to discuss before continuing your edits on the article.  You ignored that request and continued to edit war.  You violated the rules, and your being blocked was due to your actions, not mine. - SudoGhost 16:49, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep in mind that a "false" edit warring report would have been declined, as it is not up to me if you are blocked or not. I was not threatening you, your own actions threatened your being blocked, my comment was an attempt to prevent you from being blocked, not a threat ("If an editor violates 3RR by mistake, they should reverse their own most recent reversion" is the advice given on the WP:3RR page for those who have violated 3RR, and reverting yourself would have made it so the report was no longer needed, this was a good-faith attempt at resolving the issue, not a "threat").  My removal of the above comment was good-faith attempt to get you to discuss and collaborate with other editors, yet you accuse me of maliciousness, simply because another editor blocked you after you continued your edit war.  Read WP:3RR, because you were warned several times about 3RR, and chose to ignore it.


 * There is no threat directed at you, therefore I have struck your above comment. When it is apparent that there is a dispute regarding your changes, stop editing, and take it to the talk page, and resolve the issue before resuming your edits on the article.  Continuing to revert to your preferred content without stopping to discuss the edits is edit warring.  If any editor does this, and reverts four times on any given article, they are blocked, it does not matter who the editor is or how long they have been on Wikipedia.  It does not even matter if the edits they are making are the "right" edits, that behavior is not allowed.  Informing you of this is not an attack, it was an attempt to stop you from being blocked.  This was my intention, to establish a discussion and consensus on the article and to get you to stop and explain your edits.  Editors are blocked because of their own actions, never because of the actions of another editor.  The best advice I can give is, if it's clear there's disagreement about your edits, stop and discuss first, because the editor reverting may just be unclear as to why the edits are being made, and may have questions about the edit, so waiting until the discussion is resolved is always the best policy.  There's no time limit on edits, waiting another five or ten minutes to resolve any questions or concerns on an edit isn't going to be fatal to the article.  Thank you. - SudoGhost 17:11, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Personal attacks
Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User talk:Jb782. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. - SudoGhost 16:49, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi SudoGhost, You see that once again HidariMigi removed the sourced ownership information about the site from the page. I have been a victim of being posted on this site. I am also a student and I think people need to know what company owns it. He removed sourced information for no reason with no discussion. Then all of a sudden, I hear that I've been reported for something called sockpuppeting indefinitely. I'm not even sure what that is. I'm new to Wikipedia and have only been editing this page because I want to get my skills up and learn all the rules before I move on to editing really important pages. For some reason, he keeps removing information about who owns the site. I don't really have any other way to reach you accept through this page. It says I can reach editors/administrators by e-mail, but I don't know where those e-mail listings are. Any help you can provide would be greatly appreciated. Sorry that we got off to a rocky start!--Jb782 (talk) 17:15, 2 August 2011 (UTC)