Wee Curry Monster (talk | contribs) →August 2012: final warning |
Wee Curry Monster (talk | contribs) →August 2012: warning on fake cites |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:Take this as a final warning, if you insist on inserting this against concensus I will be reporting you for edit warring. [[User:Wee Curry Monster|Wee Curry Monster]] <small>[[User talk:Wee Curry Monster|talk]]</small> 08:57, 27 August 2012 (UTC) |
:Take this as a final warning, if you insist on inserting this against concensus I will be reporting you for edit warring. [[User:Wee Curry Monster|Wee Curry Monster]] <small>[[User talk:Wee Curry Monster|talk]]</small> 08:57, 27 August 2012 (UTC) |
||
::If you're planning on editing on wikipedia, please refer to [[WP:V]] and [[WP:RS]]. Dressing up your own [[WP:OR]] as supported by a cite is considered a serious affront on wikipedia. Deliberately inserting information not supported by a cite, whilst claiming it is, is likely to earn you an immediate block from editing wikipedia. Encyclopedic content must be verifiable ideally from reliable [[WP:SECONDARY]] sources. [[User:Wee Curry Monster|Wee Curry Monster]] <small>[[User talk:Wee Curry Monster|talk]]</small> 19:18, 27 August 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:18, 27 August 2012
hola
August 2012
Your recent editing history at Disputed status of Gibraltar shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. May I suggest that when 4 or more editors have reverted you pointing out your contribution is WP:OR, never mind the fact it is duplicating material already in the article, and is incorrect for grammar and English language usage, then you might be better off taking that on board instead of stubbornly edit warring to insert nonsense into an article. Wee Curry Monster talk 19:26, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Take this as a final warning, if you insist on inserting this against concensus I will be reporting you for edit warring. Wee Curry Monster talk 08:57, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
- If you're planning on editing on wikipedia, please refer to WP:V and WP:RS. Dressing up your own WP:OR as supported by a cite is considered a serious affront on wikipedia. Deliberately inserting information not supported by a cite, whilst claiming it is, is likely to earn you an immediate block from editing wikipedia. Encyclopedic content must be verifiable ideally from reliable WP:SECONDARY sources. Wee Curry Monster talk 19:18, 27 August 2012 (UTC)