User talk:Tokidokix

September 2013
Your recent editing history at Marie Curie shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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. See BRD for how this is done. 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. Binksternet (talk) 22:17, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Binksternet, I am sorry, but I think the talk page history show that I have been looking for discussion and consensus on this topic. However, my arguments keep on not being answered. And as far as I can see, the commits I am reverting were not done after a consensus-reaching discussion. Further you have stated yourself in the talk page that you were fine with the version I was reverting to. As for edit warring, I did not violate the three revert rule, and mentioned in the last commit that I was going to slow down on the revert war from now on, so as to avoid things getting too ugly. And as you should now, I have already taken steps to start a dispute resolution process.Tokidokix (talk) 02:46, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
 * If you perform a revert under the awareness that you intend to throttle back and revert less often, you are already edit warring. The 3RR brightline rule is not the only part of edit warring; there is also long-term edit warring, pushing for your preferred version against consensus, misrepresentation of others' to game the system and claim consensus, and so on. You can be blocked for disruptive editing—it's not just 3RR. Binksternet (talk) 02:58, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem is that I see no trace of broad consensus on the version you now support. On the other hand, the version I am reverting to is blessed with Good article status, which is at least an indication of consensus. So I have to disagree on the side that is pushing for his "preferred version against consensus". As for "misrepresentation of others' to game the system", if you are accusing me of doing such a thing, I would like you to be more explicit, because I do not think I have ever done such a thing...

Your recent edits
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment; or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Signature icon.png) located above the edit window.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 04:08, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Marie Curie nationality, new options.
Hello, Could you please go back to and indicate if any of the newly provided options are preferred? Thanks, Hobit (talk) 16:41, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
 * User:Hobit, thank you for the message, but real-life events had prevented me joining the discussion in the past few weeks. Although I am back now.