User talk:Public awareness

Welcome!

 * }

Your query on my talk page
I answered your query on my talk page EricSerge (talk) 05:39, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I answered you again. Take the advice on my talk page or not, I am headed to bed.  Cheers.  EricSerge (talk) 06:05, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Hill 303 massacre
I would advise using the show preview button when making edits. Your edit to Hill 303 massacre left a broken wikilink, making it look imprecise at best and non-constructive at worst. I fixed the broken wikilink. Cheers. EricSerge (talk) 15:23, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

October 2011
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on August 2010 West Bank shooting attack. 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. Please stop the useless edit warring for the article August 2010 West Bank shooting attack. You have not demonstrated any policy-based need to remove that specific quote. You may find that quote distasteful, and so may others, but it is an essential quote to understand the reaction of the settler community to the shooting. It also was reported by The New York Times -- making it a verifiable quote from a reliable source. Your opinion is irrelevant in this case. Please cease and desist or take to the talk page or you will be reported for edit warring a possible 3RR violation. Plot Spoiler (talk) 00:41, 9 October 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.

Arbitration Enforcement
There is a discussion at Arbitration Enforcement here that mentions you. — TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 19:22, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Al Qaeda
Your recent edits seem to have the appearance of edit warring. Users are expected to collaborate and discuss with others and avoid editing disruptively. Please be particularly aware, the three-revert rule states that: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss the 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 without further notice. Tom Harrison Talk 01:17, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Please do not attack other editors, as you did on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. The Bushranger One ping only 05:38, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Blocked as a sock puppet
You have been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet. –MuZemike 17:46, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

You may contest this block by adding the text below, but please read our guide to appealing blocks first.

It is fairly clear, by your editing patterns and other information, that you are the same person as User:Passionless. –MuZemike 17:46, 16 October 2011 (UTC)