User talk:Q011845

December 2011
Please do not add unsourced content, as you did to Human rights. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. As pointed out to you twice already on your IP address talk page, wikia.com does not meet Wikipedia's guideline to be a reliable source for the addition of content. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:04, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Notice of discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Human rights sourcing to humanrights.wikia.com. Thank you. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:20, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Regarding your sourcing for Human rights
User generated content (i.e. anything with "wiki" or "wikia" in the title) fails the reliable sourcing guidelines found at WP:RS. Switching from an IP address to a named account does not make a difference. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:20, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

December 2011
This is your last warning. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Philosophy of human rights, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:31, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Please do not add content sourced to Wikia to Wikipedia articles. All wikis are not reliable sources, original research is a concern, and cut-and-pasting from one wiki to another is a copyright violation. - The Bushranger One ping only 21:42, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Peace shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. 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. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please 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 a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:51, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for spamming or advertising. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Materialscientist (talk) 22:52, 21 December 2011 (UTC)