User talk:Several Pending/February 2012

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Chilamathur, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SEZ (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 6 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, it's fixed now. For the record, I wasn't the editor who originally added the link, I was merely reverting what I took to be less than constructive edits to the article. --Several Pending (talk) 11:29, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring
Your recent editing history at Pre-clinical development shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making 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. If this edit war continues, I will report you and the IP 76.254.54.132  Liam98 7   18:26, 20 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I was under the impression that 3rr didn't include the reversion of editors engaged in block evasion. Having re-read the criteria, it apears I was conflating those with banned users. My bad. --Several Pending (talk) 18:37, 20 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but I'm confused what you mean by block evasion.  Liam98 7   18:41, 20 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Block evasion: when an editor is blocked and uses another account or IP to edit while they are still blocked. In this case, 76.254.54.132 appears to be the same editor as 99.35.226.81, who was blocked for 24 hours until 18:19 today.


 * If you have the time, look through the histories of the articles that 76.254.54.132 edited (Pre-clinical development, In vitro toxicology, Toxicology, Toxicity, In vitro). You should recognise similarities in the edits of several of the IPs listed. --Several Pending (talk) 18:54, 20 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, I see what you mean...  Liam98 7   19:03, 20 February 2012 (UTC)


 * But you should report the IP as a sockpuppet instead of reverting the IP's edits over and over again.  Liam98 7   19:07, 20 February 2012 (UTC)


 * If things carry on as they are, I most likely will make such a report. --Several Pending (talk) 19:08, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Recent change
The only reason why I changed the article was because the preceeding paragraph said that Virginia ratified it on December 16, 1777, not December 15, 1778. SandSan (talk) 17:18, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Answered at SandSan's talk page. --Several Pending (talk) 18:16, 21 February 2012 (UTC)