User talk:Scalabrineformvp

March 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. THF (talk) 18:20, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia
JRSP (talk) 00:42, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Scalabrineformvp, please take a look at the conflict of interest guideline in case you're related to CEPR. Also do not attack other editors, discuss on content not on editors. Thanks and welcome again. JRSP (talk) 00:50, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

February 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Mark Weisbrot, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot.
 * Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
 * Cluebot produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Mark Weisbrot was changed by Scalabrineformvp (u) (t) deleting 14052 characters on 2010-02-09T16:56:01+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 16:56, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Please do not gratuitously remove content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 21:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Mark Weisbrot. Your edits have been automatically marked as unconstructive/possible vandalism and have been automatically reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Mark Weisbrot was changed by Scalabrineformvp (u) (t) deleting 13978 characters on 2010-02-10T20:55:47+00:00. Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 20:55, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 20:58, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 20:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war&#32;at Mark Weisbrot. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below. NW ( Talk ) 02:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * At any rate, that's still a clear CIO and violation of policy. Perhaps others will explain (I'm on vacation).  Further, you should all understand that some claims in all of these articles need independent, reliable sources and should not be sourced to "self".  You can't say "first", "widely cited", etc. because y'all say so ... you need an independent reliable source to make such claims. Also, Wiki policy (and real world common sense) argues against you calling text cited to reliable sources like The New York Times and USA Today a "smear campaign"; take it up with them.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 21:00, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

ANI
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Rd232 talk 09:59, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Block notice
You have been blocked from editing for violating Wikipedia policy. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest this block by replying here on your |talk page by adding the text. You may also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list instead, or mail.


 * You were blocked indefinitely on 15 Feb 2010 by User:NuclearWarfare on the basis of this sockpuppet investigation Sockpuppet investigations/Scalabrineformvp which concluded that you were abusing multiple accounts. If you believe this was in error, see the instructions above for appealing. Rd232 talk 09:23, 17 February 2010 (UTC)