User talk:Horkers

May 2015[edit]

Hello, I'm Winner 42. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Ian Freeman— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Winner 42 Talk to me! 16:41, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Ian Freeman. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:02, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Ian Freeman with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. Winner 42 Talk to me! 17:58, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Ian Freeman with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. Winner 42 Talk to me! 18:04, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation[edit]

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Horkers, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Winner 42 Talk to me! 18:07, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2015[edit]

Your recent editing history 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 get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:11, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note you have provided no proof that the newspaper articles are incorrect. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:13, 7 May 2015 (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:Horkers reported by User:NeilN (Result: ). Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:08, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015[edit]

Hello, I'm Winner 42. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Ian Freeman— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Winner 42 Talk to me! 21:14, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Ian Freeman. 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 appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{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. slakr^\ talk / 03:50, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]