User talk:Vrowner

May 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to HomeAway, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. NtheP (talk) 19:38, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page HomeAway. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Favonian (talk) 19:44, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to HomeAway. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Favonian (talk) 19:46, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

This is the final warning that you will receive regarding your disruptive edits, such as this edit you made to HomeAway. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing without  further notice. Favonian (talk) 19:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   19:53, 25 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Would you care to explain how any of what you added was encyclopedic in any way, shape, or form? It sure reeks of original research and WP:SOAP. ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 21:13, 25 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Additionally, could you please explain how you did not see any of these warning messages? They cause a bar to be displayed at the top of your page, thus I find it somewhat difficult to believe you didn't notice it for 20 minutes, yet continually reverted the page. -- Taelus  ( Talk ) 22:33, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. Sorry, It probably was not encyclopedic> I thought that facts could be posted and there are online sources that I got info from. But I guess it could be considered also origional research. I should have read the rules more thourouly, as I will do in the future if you choose to reinstate me. As for the warning messages, I see there were several but It was all so fast and I think the bar that appeared just said you had one new message but when I clicked on it, it did not display the warning message from what I can remember.
 * I'm sorry, but I find that hard to believe considering you received 4 warnings from 2 different editors in 10 minutes. Also, this edit gives me the impression that you knew exactly what you were doing- you saw that your edit was reverted and you reverted the revert. You need to convince administrators that you will edit constructively if you;re unblocked and, frankly, I'm not remotely convinced right now. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   23:05, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I understand how you feel and all I can say is that I really never saw the actual warning messages until after I was blocked. I promise you. If there is some way you can verify this, please do.

I did review the rules breifly but they seemed a bit open for interpretation so I was not totaly clear.

I just posted the info then typed in the link to see if the post showed up when it did not I reposted. I thought that it was some kind of software that was deleteing my post automatically and was not aware of the undor rules. All I can ask is that you give me the chance to prove myself......I will do my best to follow the rules of your site and verify if a posting is ok in the future. Thank you..


 * OK, humour me. If I were to unblock you, how would you contribute to this encyclopaedia? Also, could I ask you sign your posts on talk pages using the code ~ . HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   23:39, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok.........I need a wikimentor (new term)..........I am a writer and historian but am a bit uneducated on the rules of wikipedia......I am not sure what that means about signiing my posts like that but if you are serious, I suppose I could. Can you please explain what that means? I have posted before and never had a problem so, needless to say, I was caught off guard today. I always thought this was kind of cool but It may be a while before my next post.....but I would love to have someone review the next one so I don't mess up again...Thanks again!
 * I don't think you understand what HJ Mitchell is asking here. What pages, specifically, do you intend to edit if unblocked, and how?  -  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 04:47, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

At this point,nothing specific.


 * You already have an open unblock request. Researching a book or not, this now even more specifically violates WP:OR, and it will be your responsibility to properly WP:Cite any edits, and they must relate to established, third party reliable sources.  The improperly formatted unblock right above this seems to suggest that this is not the way you intend to proceed. ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 17:20, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

I guess I am very confused as I do not do this very often but I am glad I am getting this education. I read the wp:or link and do not intend to site my own work. I research and identify "established third party reliable sources such as books, news articles etc. that exist in both private and public libraries, on the internet etc. By interviews, I mean I have actual documented transcripts of interviews with certain people that were conducted by professionals years ago and are housed in public libraries (not sure if these are okI. These would be the sources I would cite, should I edit anything. As for the formatting, I thought maybe I had to re-submit the unblock requst each day as I was not getting a reply. I have never been blocked from anything before and I am not really familiar with computer code.  As a writer and a researcher, I do understand that things should be properly cited and intend to proceed in that manner should I edit anything.


 * The repeated re-iteration of your edit to HomeAway does not fulfil your stated policy in any particular. You quote no references, are clearly giving a personal opinion, and in my opinion are close to violating the laws of libel, at least in my part of the world (the UK). Before consideration of an unblock you will need to satisfy us that you understand, and can comply with, the policies in WP:OR, WP:POV and WP:ATTACK. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 18:51, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

I have now read and think. As I said, I thought that my posts were being automatically deleted and I did not see the warnings until I was blocked. I did not get a chance to try to add a citation, although now I am not sure they would meet the standards anyway. When I looked a the homeaway wikipedia listing, it includes a section called "Traveler concerns" already. I felt that a section called Homeowner Concerns could also be valuable. Although I have had personal experience I also consulted information from other sources including their own website. Regarding laws of libel, It is my understanding that a statement that is true does not violate these laws, althought it may still violate the policies of WP. Thank you.

vrownerVrowner (talk) 16:15, 27 May 2010 (UTC)