User talk:Yankee.doodle.666

Sirius-ly
You keep adding in information that is not cited, and I keep removing it. You are currently at three reverts for the day in the article, and I wanted to let you know, so you don't violate 3RR. You need to discuss your differences of opinion and wait for responses, not just post your views and alter the article - that's precisely how edit wars start. I believe i suggested that we have a few more people confirm the absence of the James/Harry mistake from the novel before proceeding. As well, I would direct you to the talk page archives, where the answer regarding Sirius' middle name was resovled conclusivley. It is not Orion. If you have citable proof that it is, introduce it in the Discussion area first. - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  23:12, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Its stated in the books. It needs a citation as much as the fact that his name is Sirius does. Don't be absurd. And if you want everything to be cited, then cite the James comment before it is included. follow your own advice.Yankee.doodle.666 23:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC) I am sorry, but I did warn you about the 3RR thing, which you have now violated. You have two choices: you may eitehr self-revert yourself immediately, or I file a 3RR report. Edit-warring is not acceptable. - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  23:21, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

For gods sake grow up. I'm typing out the citation for both. Give me ten minutes. And next time you decide that threatening other people is a good idea, remember that you violated 3RR as wellYankee.doodle.666 23:27, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, the talk archive does not include a discussion on this subject. especially not one since the publication of the final novel.Yankee.doodle.666 23:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * If that is the case, wouldn't it be better to actually begin discussing it when you meet resistance to the change, rather than just back-and-forth it?
 * And you might want to check the article history a bit closer - I didn't violate 3RR. I think you have missed the point: 3RR is not an electric fence; it is a guide on knowing when you are reverting another person's particular edits too much. You have reverted the same info 5 times. I gave you the 10 minutes (actually 20) to revert yourself or provide a citation, and you chose instead to use the time to argue the point rather than opt for discussion. You should have sought out the citation after the very first revert. - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  23:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Three-revert rule warning
To let you know, you have violated the three-revert rule at Sirius Black. As it seems you're relatively new and have engaged in some discussion on the matter, you will not be blocked at this time. However, please note that edit warring is considered disruptive behavior and will lead to blocks. Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:06, 3 August 2007 (UTC)