User talk:16stumps
March 2019[edit]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Unite the Right rally; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Grayfell (talk) 22:18, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Notice[edit]
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Acroterion (talk) 22:19, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
March 2019[edit]
Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Unite the Right rally. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Acroterion (talk) 21:11, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
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:16stumps reported by User:MrX (Result: ). Thank you. - MrX 🖋 21:13, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
March 2019[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:51, 17 March 2019 (UTC)Multiple accounts[edit]
Please stick to one account. Acroterion (talk) 00:47, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Response: I am only using one account. Stop falsely charging me of using multiple accounts as a means of damaging my credibility. 16stumps (talk) 07:53, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
- Struck through. There has been a sudden influx of new editors into the topic, apparently due to something on Breitbart. That sort of thing can look a lot like multiple accounts, it it looks like it's been cleared up. My apologies, it looks like a discussion is developing on the talkpage. Please use the talkpage to establish a consensus, rather than removing references and repeatedly making the same edits. Acroterion (talk) 11:44, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
The "sudden influx" is due to Scott Adams (Dilbert creator) re-tweeting my post about the unfair manner in which a select group of political partisans is allowed to lord over their pet subjects here on Wikipedia, vetoing any and all dissent. That's what the "influx" is about. 16stumps (talk) 17:47, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
April 2019[edit]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Serge F. Kovaleski; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Grayfell (talk) 23:37, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Serge F. Kovaleski shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 you 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. IanDBeacon (talk) 23:32, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
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:16stumps reported by User:IanDBeacon (Result: ). Thank you. IanDBeacon (talk) 23:41, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Block[edit]
You've been blocked from editing due to violating the 3 revert rule, for the 2nd time. Please try to be more careful in the future. El_C 23:45, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
- And just a fair warning for when you return @16stumps:, if you are caught edit-warring again, the next block will most likely be indefinite. --IanDBeacon (talk) 23:48, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
- I strongly advise you that continuing as you have been may result in your actions becoming the subject of an WP:ANI thread. I also remind you that you may be blocked under the discretionary sanctions notice w/o an ANI discussion. Please stop disrupting Wikipedia. DlohCierekim 00:48, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Talkpage access disabled due to abuse/. Acroterion (talk) 22:32, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
April 2019[edit]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Serge F. Kovaleski; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Binksternet (talk) 12:29, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:13, 24 April 2019 (UTC)May 2019[edit]
This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, as you did at Serge F. Kovaleski, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Grayfell (talk) 20:02, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bishonen | talk 20:08, 15 May 2019 (UTC)- Adding: per your block log and your attacks at Talk:Serge F. Kovaleski, and your follow-up here on this page, it seems clear that you are not here to contribute constructively. I've also removed your access to this page, since you have some form wrt abusing it. If you wish to appeal this block, please use WP:UTRS. Bishonen | talk 20:11, 15 May 2019 (UTC).