User talk:Purplepower2012

September 2012
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Dog with a Blog. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ''Verifiability requires that "any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material." Removal of the citation needed tags without adding citations is inappropriate.'' AussieLegend (talk) 09:42, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

October 2012
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Dog with a Blog, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:06, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit-warring
Your recent editing history at Dog With a Blog shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. AussieLegend ( ✉ ) 01:06, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
AussieLegend ( ✉ ) 01:28, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Dog With a Blog. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. AussieLegend ( ✉ ) 04:42, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

November 2012
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Dog With a Blog. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:30, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Non-free images
Please note that non-free images, such as File:Dog with a Blog Cast.jpg, must be low resolution in order to comply with our non-free content policy. A few days ago I reduced the size of that image so it would comply with the policy and tagged it with furd so that earlier, non-compliant images would be deleted. Reverting to the earlier, high-resolution version of the same image, as you did today, is inappropriate, as it restored a non-compliant image. --AussieLegend ( ✉ ) 07:26, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Dog With a Blog. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. ''References used must meet standards set in WP:RS. The ones you keep adding don't. They are blogs, rumors and anonymous comments. Find better references and stop using these ones.'' Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:01, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:24, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

November 2012
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Dog With a Blog, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. AussieLegend ( ✉ ) 07:55, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Please stop changing File:Dog with a Blog Cast.jpg. The image is supposed to be an image of the cast, not a partial cast photo with what amounts to pointless text. As I've explained to you earlier, images must comply with our non-free content policy and large images do not. Additionally, you've changed the image without changing the caption in the article, which still reflects the previous, compliant version, making the image you've uploaded inappropriate for multiple reasons. If you think the image should be changed, discuss it on the file's talk page. I assume that you're using it to justify your changes to the infobox at Dog With a Blog. Unfortunately, you're going completely the wrong way about doing that. Regarding these edits, they've resulted in some very inappropriate results that broke the infobox and left the article in a damaged state. I will be fixing this shortly - Please view the article's edit history soon to see why they're inappropriate. If you want to provide verification that uma has been credited, use Cite episode, don't damage an image. And please, start using edit summaries. --<span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#fee72c 0em 0em 0.8em,gold -0.8em -0.8em 0.9em,#1D6B00 0.7em 0.7em 0.8em;color:#000000">AussieLegend (<span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#fee72c 0em 0em 0.8em,gold -0.8em -0.8em 0.9em,#1D6B00 0.7em 0.7em 0.8em;color:#000000"> ✉ ) 08:31, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at File:Dog with a Blog Cast.jpg shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:52, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not replace pages with blank content, as you did with this edit to Template:High-risk, as this is confusing to readers. The page's content has been restored for now. If there is a problem with the page, it should be edited or reverted to a previous version if possible; if you think the page should be removed entirely, see further information. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 21:34, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at File:Dog with a Blog Cast.jpg, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:35, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at File:Dog with a Blog Cast.jpg, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:39, 10 November 2012 (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. Thank you. --Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:53, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit-warring, disruptive editing, and personal attacks. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 22:45, 10 November 2012 (UTC)