User talk:SgtAvestrand1956

You have been blocked for 48 hours for disruptive editing on Physician assistant: repeated undo/redo of edits, lack of edit summaries, and the fact that you have been blocked for 3RR before all contributed to this decision. Any further (post-block) unproductive editing from you on this article will result in a topic ban. Jclemens (talk) 19:34, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Your block has been extended to a week for your using the account User:TheMedicated as a sockpuppet to continue your disruptive editing during your block. You still have the ability to edit this talk page, but you may not use it to blank this warning until the duration of your block has expired. Further disruption will result in an indefinite block. Jclemens (talk) 20:03, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

You have been from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for persistent vandalism. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Jclemens (talk) 04:55, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text below.

Unblock request of SgtAvestrand1956

 * Comment from blocking admin: this is the diff that prompted this post.
 * SgtAvestrand1956, please list all the accounts you have previously used as sockpuppets on Wikipedia. Please also explain, based on your reading of WP:BRD and related editing courtesy documents, how you will resolve any sunsequent content disuputes with other editors. Jclemens (talk) 16:43, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Qelkvnap

Qelknap

Nhev114

Axisguy

YaleMed2001

TheMedicated

Would only make the edits keeping them focused. Would get the views of those who comment on my edit, and compromise. Would be clear about when I'm compromising and expect others to compromise but do not expect it to be totally even; Would discuss on my edit summaries, editing constructively with reliable sources, and apply generally valid sourced edits. If others editors don't want to its alright, but would sure offer; if they accept the change history would demonstrate other editors agree; this prevents me from falling afoul of 3RR. Would assume revision not be the final. Would find consensus, and let them settle. It would give editors a point to build from.SgtAvestrand1956 (talk) 17:19, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

For info, there is a rather longer sock list here: Sockpuppet_investigations/Nrse/Archive. Kevin (talk) 22:17, 14 August 2009 (UTC)