User talk:Protomoney

Thankyou for Good Money Edits.
Thanks for your editing to the history of money, which clarify this difficult subject.Benny the wayfarer (talk) 16:10, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps some of them were good, but your recent distinguishing of protomoney is unsourced and disputed, so should not remain in the articles. &mdash; Arthur Rubin  (talk) 23:27, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * For what it's worth, please pay particular attention to the 3RR rule, on money and history of money. To ensure I haven't missed anything, the templated warning is below:

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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 a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. &mdash; Arthur Rubin (talk) 03:18, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * At this point, adding references to protomoney or proto-money where it had been previously removed, should logically be considered a revert, even if you use different wording. And, as an involved admin, I won't block for that, but I will report it to WP:AN/3RR, and encourage the other editors who agree you are full of adding unsourced and improbable material to do so.  &mdash; Arthur Rubin  (talk) 03:22, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Warning about pushing your point of view on Wikipedia
Hello Protomoney. I see that your first article edit after coming off your last block is reminiscent of those that got you blocked in the first place. Please be aware that we are not very tolerant of editors who want to use Wikipedia as a soapbox, to establish the truth of some long-ignored point of view. (See WP:TRUTH). If you continue to promote your distinctive philosophy on 'protomoney', you will probably be blocked again. Take a look at WP:5P for our general principles, and please consider doing work in some other area.

If you don't respond to this request, you may be blocked in a matter of minutes. Please consider the wisdom of following our policies and paying attention to feedback from others. EdJohnston (talk) 18:37, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * On my Talk, you asked what I know about money. I don't have to know anything about money, I just observe that you are adding unreferenced material to our articles about money. Your distinctive point of view, whatever it may be, does not belong on Wikipedia. We need to go from the opinions that have been expressed in reliable sources, which usually means formally published work. Does 'protomoney' make an appearance in any economics textbooks? EdJohnston (talk) 18:41, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Are you kidding? Haven t you seen the references I added? Protomoney (talk) 18:42, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm still waiting to hear of a reliable source that uses the term 'protomoney.' EdJohnston (talk) 18:49, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The formal term is pre-coin or pre-money. If you like this term, you can edit and change it. Protomoney (talk)
 * And where is protomoney term in the article I reverted? You are ignorant of money history, you havent read the article at all. All you know is block people for 24 hours. Congratulations! Protomoney (talk) 18:53, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * (ec) cn. I would also like to remind you of WP:V and WP:3RR, in case it hasn't been done before.  Your first action coming off a block being reverting an article to your last version, in spite of other intervening edits, might be considered a violation of WP:OWN.  (And I think I found "protomoney" there, before you removed it after the first revert.  Now, only the name has changed.)  &mdash; Arthur Rubin  (talk) 18:56, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Could you please stop this comedy? I dont care about the term protomoney, If you dont like it replace it with pro-money, or pre-money.Protomoney (talk) 18:59, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I caution User:Protomoney that this conversation is not going to continue much longer. Either you agree to follow Wikipedia policies, or we will pursue conventional administrative actions. EdJohnston (talk) 19:01, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thats it. I understand. You are ignorant of history of money, you haven't read anything I wrote, but you have the force to ban people. You are like the solder who killed archimedes, ignorant yes, but you gave the sword!!! God bless you, I am not going to continue discussing with you. You can ban me or whoever at your wish, you macho man! Protomoney (talk) 19:06, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Your edits are being discussed at the Administrators' noticeboard
Hello Protomoney. Please see this thread. You are welcome to add your own comments there. EdJohnston (talk) 20:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Blocked for a week
You've returned to disruptive editing, after being warned numerous times by numerous people to stop it. Due to this behavior, I have placed a 1-week block on your editing Wikipedia.

Please do not continue this behavior when the block expires. Continuing to try and insert material over and over again which is disputed by many others is disruptive editing and edit warring - these are not acceptable ways to work on Wikipedia. If you believe that the current articles are strongly flawed, please bring your sources and proposed changes to the article talk pages and participate in cooperative discussion there. If you can convince other editors then that's fine. If you can't, if consensus is that your information is not relevant or appropriate, then it doesn't belong here.

You are welcome to return and contribute in a cooperative and constructive manner. If you chose not to conduct yourself by Wikipedia's behavior standards, then you'll be blocked again. We prefer not to do that - we prefer that everyone cooperate and behave in a professional manner. Please abide by our community standards on behavior and sourcing information.

Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 21:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)