User talk:Youalrightbruv2017

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Youalrightbruv2017, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! - DVdm (talk) 09:23, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016[edit]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Liam Neeson. Thank you. 4TheWynne^{(talk)(contribs)} 23:29, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did with this edit to Liam Neeson, you may be blocked from editing. DVdm (talk) 09:17, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note re your edit summary of this edit: no, "Northern Ireland" is not the same as "the island of Ireland". That edit does not "enhance the readers' experience", on the contrary. The cited source is essentially about Northern Ireland. - DVdm (talk) 09:22, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you blank out or remove content from Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Liam Neeson. DVdm (talk) 09:24, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Liam Neeson shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—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—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. - DVdm (talk) 09:37, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Youalrightbruv2017 reported by User:331dot (Result: ). Thank you. 331dot (talk) 10:12, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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 request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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) 10:14, 22 December 2016 (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).

Youalrightbruv2017 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My goal is to make the article engaging as possible. As I had explained in the Liam Neeson article, mentioning Ireland in the intro, and, specifically putting Northern Ireland in the 'early life' section. I am new to Wikipedia and I was editing from a mobile device, and no notifications/warnings appeared. I have only seen this after logging in on a computer. My claim that my interpretation 'enhances the readers' experience' has been dismissed. "Smells biased" was how my good intended edits were labelled. Later, I told that 'we' use state names, not geographical terms. Wikipedia describes NI as a "top-level constituent unit of the United Kingdom in the northeast of Ireland.[8] It is variously described as a country, province, region, or "part" of the United Kingdom, amongst other terms.[9][10][11]". NI is not a state, as you can see. The state is called the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. I changed it to, what should be by the opposition's definition, correct. This was later changed back to 'Northern Ireland', even though I had changed it to 'United Kingdom'. I was correct. I am disappointed in the treatment I have received by the Wikipedia community, especially because of the fact another user suggested that my contributions for the greater good of wikipedia were 'biased'. I understand the point, but I feel patronised.

Decline reason:

It's not at all clear you understand the point. You were blocked for edit-warring and your unblock request doesn't address this at all. Yamla (talk) 13:02, 22 December 2016 (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.