User talk:SSM Enigma

Geoffrey Gordon
at Geoffrey Gordon (composer) was in contravention of several WP:Manual of Style guidelines. In detail: I have restored those improvements to the article. Please familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's MoS. You might also consider Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:30, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) According to WP:OVERLINK, common terms are not wikilinked; that includes "United States" and "Washington, D.C."
 * 2) The subject's name is to be bolded only once, in the 1st sentence; see MOS:BOLD.
 * 3) The subject is to be referred to by his surname – no "Mr. Gordon"; see MOS:SURNAME.
 * 4) All quotations must be sourced; see WP:QUOTE.
 * 5) Wikipedia text doesn't use the ellipsis character (…) but three dots; see MOS:ELLIPSIS.
 * 6) Wikipedia text does not use inline external links; they belong in citations, or in "External links"; see WP:EL.
 * 7) Section headings are written in sentence case, not in title case ("List of Works"), not in all-caps ("SOLO"); see MOS:HEADINGS.
 * 8) When an editor requests a citation, the template must not be removed without addressing the matter; see WP:BURDEN.
 * 9) The name of a NYT editor was misspelled twice.
 * 10) Unusual styling of titles is usually disregarded in Wikipedia (not "QUINTET", but "Quintet"); see MOS:TITLECAPS.
 * 11) Wikipedia distinguishes between hyphen, en dash, and em dash; each has their role; see MOS:DASH.
 * 12) Repeated blank characters, and trailing blanks, have no purpose; when other substantial edits take place, they should be removed.

Your recent editing history at Geoffrey Gordon (composer) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 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. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:15, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Regarding summary: "Changes to capitalization against composer's own specific titles. Irresponsible revisions." You should note that a composer's styling of the titles of his works is not always how they are listed in Wikipedia articles; I've linked to the relevant section of the MoS above. The phrase "Irresponsible revisions" borders on violating WP:CIVIL, is not supported by the details of my edits, and I reject it emphatically.
 * More seriously, the capitalisation of section headings in Wikipedia articles is a completely different matter, and there is no uncertainty: they use sentence case, never WP:ALLCAPS. I added a few helpful links in ; I think they will add to a reader's understanding of the article. You've reverted that, too. If you have concerns about some aspects of my edits to the article, please engage in discussion and address the points I mentioned above, and why you think they're wrong. Otherwise, your edits can be seen as disruptive. I suggest you revert yourself and restore numerous improvements to the article. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:05, 21 December 2017 (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. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:16, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

December 2017
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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:. Neil N  talk to me 05:32, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

See WP:OWN --Neil N  talk to me 05:32, 24 December 2017 (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:. Neil N  talk to me 14:05, 24 December 2017 (UTC)