User talk:Sy Hersh

Welcome!
Welcome to Wikipedia, Sy Hersh! Thank you for your contributions. I am VQuakr and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Questions or type at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! VQuakr (talk) 02:41, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article

February 2014
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Mint Press News has been reverted. Your edit here to Mint Press News was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://i.imgur.com/dbXi86M.png) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. an image file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy and therefore probably should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file. 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) 03:08, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm VQuakr. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Mint Press News seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. VQuakr (talk) 04:36, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Mint Press News
Re Mint Press News, I have reverted your addition. A Facebook screenshot is not a valid source for the sort of conclusion you are inferring, as discussed at our policy on reliable sourcing and our policy on original synthesis. Your section header change also violated WP:NPOV. There is definitely room for improvement in the article, but since the topic is contentious I suggest discussing changes first on the article talk page. Thanks! VQuakr (talk) 04:39, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm XLinkBot. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the page Mint Press News, because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Your edit here to Mint Press News was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://i.imgur.com/dbXi86M.png) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. an image file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy and therefore probably should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file. 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) 05:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Mint Press News. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. —Josh3580talk/hist 06:23, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Mint Press News. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. VQuakr (talk) 06:23, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, as you did with this edit to Mint Press News. —Josh3580talk/hist 06:28, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. VQuakr (talk) 08:50, 9 February 2014 (UTC) You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. 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. Materialscientist (talk) 09:36, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Your account has been blocked indefinitely because its username is a blatant violation of our username policy – it is obviously profane; threatens, attacks or impersonates another person; or suggests that your intention is not to contribute to the encyclopedia (see our blocking and username policies for more information). We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia, but users are not allowed to edit with inappropriate usernames, nor is trolling or other disruptive behavior ever tolerated. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text on your user talk page, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Daniel Case (talk) 19:35, 10 February 2014 (UTC)


 * There may be more than one, but I doubt there's more than one that works for Mint Press News. — Jeremy  v^_^v  Bori! 05:00, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Actually thats quite a moronic egostical pompous response from Anthony Bradbury and proves he did not read my request or is incapable of the faculty of reason. If he checked my registration he will note I registered for the first time on wikipedia that evening on the 9th (for the specific purpose of adding some balance to the smear attack on the Mint Press News page) and within 30 minutes I was indefinitely blocked for repeated additions of the same edit. Now what does that tell you? Do you think that if I knew I was receiving messages and requests I would just carry on regardless still ignoring them at risk of being blocked? Utterly completely moronic reasoning. You actually think I DELIBERATELY ignored 7 warnings within the space of 30 minutes??

And why should I change my username? It IS my name. There are 7 billion people on this planet.I am sure there is more than one Anthony Bradbury. I have done nothing wrong except be over eager to edit this wikipedia page and failed to notice I had all these warnings on a 'talk' page.