Malik Shabazz (talk | contribs) m →Slavery: tweak |
Malik Shabazz (talk | contribs) →3RR: new section |
||
Line 48: | Line 48: | ||
:::There are two sentences. If you follow the footnote to the source, you will see that they have been copied and pasted from the source. Copyright violations are taken very seriously on Wikipedia. The next time you add or restore COPYVIO material, you will be '''[[WP:block|block]]ed'''. — [[User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] <sup>[[User talk:Malik Shabazz|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|Stalk]]</sub> 18:14, 9 February 2011 (UTC) |
:::There are two sentences. If you follow the footnote to the source, you will see that they have been copied and pasted from the source. Copyright violations are taken very seriously on Wikipedia. The next time you add or restore COPYVIO material, you will be '''[[WP:block|block]]ed'''. — [[User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] <sup>[[User talk:Malik Shabazz|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|Stalk]]</sub> 18:14, 9 February 2011 (UTC) |
||
== 3RR == |
|||
You've broken [[WP:3RR|3RR]]. I recommend you self-revert or I'll report you at [[WP:ANEW]]. — [[User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] <sup>[[User talk:Malik Shabazz|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|Stalk]]</sub> 03:01, 11 February 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:01, 11 February 2011
Robert Mugabe
Hi. I've asked you a couple of questions here. Cheers, Olaf Davis (talk) 10:41, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
March 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Robert Mugabe, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Woogee (talk) 07:26, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- I disagree. I think that most of the edits are useful and constructive. However, please engage on Talk: - otherwise these edits will not stick. Wizzy…☎ 04:06, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
- Deleting sourced material without discussion is unhelpful. This is a third request for you to explain your editing and seek consensus with other editors. Will Beback talk 07:30, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Blocked for 31 hours for edit warring on Robert Mugabe
We require that editors cooperate and discuss disagreements in article content in a collaborative manner, on article or user talk pages. Continuing to change or revert content without discussion is called edit warring. We have a specific rule against making the same change more than 3 times in 24 hours as well, the Three Revert Rule.
You have engaged in a long series of edit warring edits on Robert Mugabe. Despite warnings you have continued to do so. To stop the edit warring, I have blocked your account for 31 hrs.
When the block expires, you are free to edit again. However - your future edits need to be in accord with the edit war policy. You need to stop simply remaking changes when someone else objects, and discuss them in the article talk page.
Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 03:51, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/39/Stop_x_nuvola_with_clock.svg/40px-Stop_x_nuvola_with_clock.svg.png)
{{unblock|Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 23:44, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
stop vandalism in Robert Mugabe
There are allegations Mugabe and other elite members are involved in diamond trade ! So just stop lobbying for Mugabe - thanks ! Handy-TV (talk) 17:18, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
January 2011
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on African people. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful, then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. 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 edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Acroterion (talk) 19:08, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
- You've reverted four times today and may be blocked if you continue. Please await a consensus. Acroterion (talk) 19:11, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
- I've reported your six reverts at WP:AN3. You are clearly out of line, but since I reverted one time I am not personally taking administrative action. Acroterion (talk) 21:56, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/39/Stop_x_nuvola_with_clock.svg/40px-Stop_x_nuvola_with_clock.svg.png)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Courcelles 21:57, 10 January 2011 (UTC)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.
Hello
Could you explain y your removing the word black and in the process with some edits delinking the main "ethnic" article from the lead in articles? After looking at your edits closer I see a much bigger problem ..Will think about what to do. Moxy (talk) 01:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
"Black African"
Why are you taking the word "black" out of so many articles about black Africans and their descendants? In most cases, non-black Africans are not considered part of the group described in the article. Please explain. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 21:48, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
When an editor removes material that clearly violates copyright law ("copyvio"), you'd better have a good reason to revert. Please don't do it again unless you'd like to be blocked. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 05:06, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- It doesn't suffice to write copyvio to delete text. There's nothing remotely close to being a copyright violation here in this one sentence. It's simply sourced material.
- There are two sentences. If you follow the footnote to the source, you will see that they have been copied and pasted from the source. Copyright violations are taken very seriously on Wikipedia. The next time you add or restore COPYVIO material, you will be blocked. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:14, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
3RR
You've broken 3RR. I recommend you self-revert or I'll report you at WP:ANEW. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:01, 11 February 2011 (UTC)