User talk:MG2020DTC

Hello, I'm GoodCrossing. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.
 * Hey, I've noticed you're editing the text to make it more neutral. To be honest, I'm also quite new so I'm not sure if it should be further updated but thanks for contributing! GoodCrossing (talk) 21:29, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

February 2020
As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:MG2020DTC, and the template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 05:50, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi GSS. You are incorrect in your assumption. Please educate yourself by reading the edit thread and comments between me and GoodCrossing. --> "Hey, I've noticed you're editing the text to make it more neutral. To be honest, I'm also quite new so I'm not sure if it should be further updated but thanks for contributing! GoodCrossing (talk) 21:29, 8 January 2020 (UTC)" --MG2020DTC (talk) 16:25, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

In addition, I have reverted the article to the previous version that meets Wikipedias Guidelines and was edited with the help of GoodCrossing before you intervened. Please take note that this version provides valuable, non biased information based on the following :

provide accurate references for information that's already in the article (and we have a strong preference that the reference/citation be a reliable source) add or update facts, such as a person's date or place of birth, a company's location or number of employees, or details of a recent event - and if you do, please add a reference/citation; otherwise, other editors have no way of knowing if the change is true or not MG2020DTC (talk) 16:32, 5 February 2020 (UTC)


 * There is very clear evidence to support my claim and your edit has been reverted back so, please do not revert back and see WP:DISCLOSEPAY and WP:3RR. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 17:10, 5 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I am sorry you feel that way and that you feel entitled to bully me. Please see WP:3RR yourself and adhere to that rule, as you were the first person to revert changes, you will be in breach of this before I am. Thanks. MG2020DTC (talk) 17:27, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at The Plum Guide shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 17:31, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. Invalid OS (talk) 17:36, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

February 2020
You may be blocked from editing without further warning if you make any further edits without responding to the inquiry you received regarding undisclosed paid editing. moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 17:44, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

I have already replied. The user:GSS has been spamming a page for no apparent reason. Said users edits should get him blocked, as he started the war. MG2020DTC (talk) 17:50, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring, as you did at The Plum Guide. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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 think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Bbb23 (talk) 18:13, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

MG2020DTC (talk) 02:27, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I've revoked your access to this page. If you are not more temperate in your conduct when this block expires, you risk being indefinitely blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 03:01, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me &#124; my contributions 18:51, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Continuing to edit war using IPs and evading your block using the second IP has landed you with an indefinite block. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me &#124; my contributions 18:53, 10 February 2020 (UTC)