User talk:Sanchopanchez

Welcome!

 * }

October 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Jamie Comstock has been reverted. Your edit here to Jamie Comstock was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links in references which are discouraged per our reliable sources guideline. The reference(s) you added or changed email address removed) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Wikipedia pages should not contain personal information such as email addresses. For more information, please read Wikipedia:Biography of Living People, specifically the section about personal information. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert.  However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 04:26, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

December 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding or significantly changing content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Jim1138 (talk) 02:12, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

January 2012
Your recent editing history 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. Calabe1992 15:24, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Note / warning
On Wikipedia, revert warring like you just doing normally leads to blocks for everybody involved, regardless of who is "right". I did not block either of you since I am not certain if either of you knew about the three revert rule. Please discuss your changes on the talk page of the article rather than reverting, which accomplishes nothing. Additionally, phrases such as "[his] career was marked by controversy" are not very neutral, and all articles&mdash;especially those about living people&mdash;must be neutral. You may wish to seek out dispute resolution. Thank you. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:33, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Jamie Comstock
The way Wikipedia should work is described at WP:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle - if a change you make is reverted, do not simply make it again, which (as you have seen) leads to WP:Edit warring, but discuss it on the article talk page and endeavour to reach WP:Consensus with other users. If you cannot reach consensus, there are WP:Dispute resolution procedures. For articles concerned with living persons, there is a policy at WP:Biographies of living persons, advice at WP:BLP/H, and a notice-board at WP:BLP/N to invite intervention from uninvolved users.

I have protected the article for a week and posted at WP:BLP/N to invite help. You are welcome to join in the discussion on the article talk page. Please Wikipedia's policy of WP:No personal attacks - comment on content, not on contributors.

I am sorry that things have gone so far before anyone has explained all this to you. Please read carefully the policy WP:Biographies of living persons. If you will engage in discussion on the talk page, I will unprotect the article so that others can work on improving it; but if you then start edit warring again, you will probably be blocked rather than re-protect the article. JohnCD (talk) 19:13, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

July 2012
Please do not remove information from articles, as you did to Jamie Comstock. Wikipedia is not censored, and content is not removed on the sole grounds of perceived offensiveness. Please discuss this issue on the article's talk page to reach consensus rather than continuing to remove the disputed material. If the content in question involves images, you also have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide the images that you may find offensive. Thank you. Athleek  123  01:16, 3 July 2012 (UTC)