User talk:Zacksfenton

The talk page comment I mentioned

It's in your contributions -- see " 21:21, 17 October 2015 (diff | hist) . . (+81)‎ . . User talk:Dbrodbeck ‎ (Undid revision 685445541 by Dbrodbeck (talk) Trolling and pushing biased wording.)". It is possible to view the IP addresses of accounts. People who can do this are trusted members of the community called WP:Check users and can only do this in a narrowly limited set of circumstances, mainly to identify if a user is using more than one account. As a member of the Arbitration Committee I technically can do this but it would not be a legitimate use of the checkuser tool. In any case you should now be able to see the link. Doug Weller (talk) 17:55, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We call this page your talk page, and it is used for a variety of purposes, warnings included. These are warnings, not threats. They are basically statements that if you continue to do x then y is likely to follow. Dbrodbeck isn't an Administrator so couldn't block you but could report you. I could block you if, for instance, you continued to edit war (hopefully that won't happen), but I wouldn't because we are involved in a content discussion so it would be inappropriate for me to take action. Doug Weller (talk) 17:59, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I couldn't find it because I was looking for 21:21 not 20:21 - must be because of timezone differences. In any case, thank you for removing the comment.

I did see that someone had written the following on his talk page: Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to User_talk:Logos has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page.Thank you. Logos (talk) 05:08, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems as if this wasn't the first time that he had overused these templates to bully another user out of making contributions.Zacksfenton (talk) 18:11, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Spoke too soon. 3 reverts isn't an entitlement and you are edit warring again. You don't have WP:CONSENSUS and are likely to be reported for editwarring, perhaps by me, if you continue. Doug Weller (talk) 18:03, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't the person submitting the change need the consensus? I'm reverting to the original version and he is making the change to the page without consensus.Zacksfenton (talk) 18:12, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Short answer is that several editors reverted you. When that happens it's a sign that you need to stop and discuss on the talk page. Whether you need consensus to change depends - sometimes if you are going to make a major change you need to look at the talk page. In this case I think people simply hadn't noticed or realised the implications of the wording. Doug Weller (talk) 22:00, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]