User talk:Sceneshock

3RR
You have violated the 3RR policy on Stalin, which allows no more than 3 reverts in 24 hours. Please read WP:3RR. - Merzbow (talk) 23:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The tag clearly says not to remove it until the dispute has been resolved. You're breaking policy not me. Sceneshock (talk) 23:10, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * You are in violation of WP:3RR, I suggest you revert your most recent edit to avoid a block. 1  !=  2  23:11, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, it has already been reverted by someone else so that opportunity is lost. I will not personally make a 3RR block at this time, but someone else may choose to. Please do not repeatedly revert like that. 1  !=  2  23:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * So this is how wikipedia functions? An article is considered neutral if two users edit war against one user to remove the tag. So in conclusion, the POV article stays POV, the readers aren't warned about it, and the two users edit warring get off scott free. Great system. Sceneshock (talk) 23:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * No, you read the advice at Dispute resolution, what you do not do is revert over and over. 1  !=  2  00:58, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked from editing for in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below.


 * I interpreted "they (actually just one user)" to be a claim that the users with whom you were disagreeing were just one person (sockpuppets). If that claim was not your intention, I apologize for my misinterpretation. --B (talk) 01:01, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * One user out of thinking an article is POV does not make it POV. That's why there is no policy against removing a tag (almost any tag). However, there is a policy against edit warring, because this is a serious source of concerns. --  lucasbfr  talk 09:20, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * One user huh? That's interesting, considering that I'm not even the one who put the tag there in the first place, and there were multiple people in talk who think the tag should stay which is what prompted me to become involved in the first place. But hey I guess if you just accuse everyone who strives for NPOV of being a "sockpuppet" for having a certain point of view (actually I'm not pro-Stalin and I'm anti-communist, I just think the article is a load of crap considering he's a very significant historical figure) and systematically block them all, things sort themselves out and wikipedia...well...continues to suck? I don't know, I guess edit warring really is more harmful to the world of online information than biased articles/borderline disinformation. Sceneshock (talk) 16:21, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * We didn't make up WP:3RR just for you buddy, we apply it fairly broadly. You break it, you get blocked. This has nothing to do with content. 1  !=  2  16:35, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Editors may still be blocked even if they have made three or fewer reverts in a 24 hour period, if their behavior is clearly disruptive. - I guess 3 reverts within 20 minutes to remove an POV tag on a contentious article without making a valid argument in discussion isn't disruptive behavior right? I guess it's just one of those rules that exist solely to reinforce double standards and assure that no editor gets in the way of the "ideal" POV that administrators see fit, all the while never applying said rule to editors who are disruptive but in agreeance. Sceneshock (talk) 17:08, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Please email me
Please email me regarding the findings at Requests for checkuser/Case/Jacob Peters. You can use thatcher131 at gmail dot com. Thatcher 20:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)