User talk:Ron Wells, MDiv.

Welcome![edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! power~enwiki (π, ν) 04:36, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ron Wells, MDiv., you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi Ron Wells, MDiv.! 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 Cordless Larry (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

=

Copyright violations and Edit Warring[edit]

One of your recent edits has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Canterbury Tail talk 19:55, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Canterbury Tail talk 19:55, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.

Canterbury Tail talk 20:23, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just because you blocked me/had a hand in blocking me doesn't mean I was wrong. Ron Wells, MDiv. (talk) 11:36, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: I didn't need to put a slash in there. I didn't to put had a hand in blocking me in there either. You blocked me but that does not mean I was wrong. Ron Wells, MDiv. (talk) 11:46, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, Canterbury Tail and Ron Wells, MDiv., but what is being insinuated for when this block is over? Do you wish to collaborate or shall we continue with removing information for this sake? I am genuinely interested. Forgive me if it is not my place, Canterbury Tail, but I felt the desire to understand since I was involved in this matter. - TheLionHasSeen (talk) 14:08, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My expectation when this block is over is for both users to discuss this matter on the article's talk page and reach WP:CONSENSUS and not engage in another edit war. If I find either of you edit warring over this again without a consensus on the talk page that user will be blocked. Canterbury Tail talk 15:04, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seems good to me!!! - TheLionHasSeen (talk) 15:05, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Every source is not a reputable source. I didn't do what I all of what I did for selfish purposes. I haven't made one accusation to any of you. You all who were critical of me don't have all the information. You criticizers don't intimidate me one bit. Ron Wells, MDiv. (talk) 03:08, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Subtract the first what. Ron Wells, MDiv. (talk) 03:09, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ron Wells, MDiv.. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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 ~~~~}}. ST47 (talk) 12:47, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]