User talk:FactfinderNZ

FactfinderNZ, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi FactfinderNZ! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like GreenMeansGo (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

November 2020[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Christian Tybring-Gjedde. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, 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 lose their editing privileges on that page. 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. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 10:30, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that in this edit to Christian Tybring-Gjedde, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. 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. Materialscientist (talk) 10:32, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Christian Tybring-Gjedde, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. DoebLoggs (talk) 10:39, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. 331dot (talk) 10:44, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have blocked you for legal threats, but you were close to being blocked for edit warring as well. We cannot stop you from exercising any legal rights you have in your country, but you cannot make legal threats on Wikipedia, or if you have a legal action underway. You can pursue your grievances in the courts of your country or on Wikipedia, but not both. You must clearly withdraw the threat in order to be unblocked, and also describe the proper ways to handle editing disputes. 331dot (talk) 10:47, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

FactfinderNZ (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Legal action withdrawn - you get to have you power trip FactfinderNZ (talk) 11:05, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Knock it off. This approach is incompatible with Wikipedia. As per below, please address your edit warring and please convince us you'll edit in a collaborative manner going forward. Yamla (talk) 14:01, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Someone else will review your request. This is not about any power trip, but about Wikipedia policy. You also have not addressed your edit warring. We are willing to hear your viewpoint and discuss your concerns, but you will need to adopt a more collaborative and less combative approach. 331dot (talk) 13:24, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]