User talk:Wdcraven

February 2014

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Global warming conspiracy theory has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Global warming conspiracy theory was changed by Wdcraven (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.920206 on 2014-02-23T07:48:21+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 07:48, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Global warming conspiracy theory. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. I am One of Many (talk) 17:43, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

3RR violation

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Global warming conspiracy theory. 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.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. 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; 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. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 18:37, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

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:Wdcraven_reported_by_User:NewsAndEventsGuy (Result: ). Thank you. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:03, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours 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 appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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.  Mifter (talk) 20:33, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. McSly (talk) 17:15, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

DS alert - climate change

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Climate change, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 17:59, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

January 2016

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, you may be blocked from editing. McSly (talk) 18:46, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Global warming conspiracy theory. Specifically, when you add deliberate contrary to fact content and then use deceptive edit summaries to hide it, that is vandalism. I am One of Many (talk) 19:07, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Let me add that no matter how far opinions differ, I have a hard time coming up with an excuse for changing an actual attributed quotation to something completely different. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 21:00, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Using an edit summary of "Corrected grammatical errors" for an edit that dramatically changes the meaning of text is blatantly dishonest. Any further edits of this nature will result in a request for sanctions at WP:AE. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 21:24, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

May 2021

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page 2020 United States presidential election has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. HaeB (talk) 18:02, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}.

Daniel Case (talk) 18:31, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I said nothing untrue or unsupported. I made minor appropriate edits to indicate that there are differing views on the validity of the 2020 election. When politely trying to share that there are opposing viewpoints becomes grounds for an indefinite ban we have destroyed our democracy. You might notice it has been many months since I have used Wikipedia and in my lifetime I have made very few editsWdcraven (talk) 01:51, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This is not a typo, it's a lie. The block is entirely appropriate. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 02:43, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

---

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.

Wdcraven (talk) 01:51, 27 April 2022 (UTC)