Blackbeard2k7 (talk | contribs) moved comment to the appropriate section, as per the previous edit |
→M.U.L.E.: 3rr |
||
Line 112: | Line 112: | ||
* I looked at the links and agree, which is why I didn't revert it. <b>[[User talk:EliminatorJR|<font color="indigo">E<small>LIMINATOR</small></font><font color="crimson">JR</font>]]</b> 15:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC) |
* I looked at the links and agree, which is why I didn't revert it. <b>[[User talk:EliminatorJR|<font color="indigo">E<small>LIMINATOR</small></font><font color="crimson">JR</font>]]</b> 15:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC) |
||
Whatever about the suitability of the link ... |
|||
[[Image:Nuvola_apps_important.svg|25px]] You are in danger of violating the [[Wikipedia:three-revert rule|three-revert rule]]{{{{{subst|}}}#if:M.U.L.E.| on [[:M.U.L.E.]]}}. Please cease further reverts or you may be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing.<!-- {{uw-3rr3}} --> - [[User:Alison|<span style="color:#558; font-family: comic sans ms; font-variant: small-caps">'''A<font color= "#7070a0">l<font color= "#9090c0">is</font>o</font>n'''</span>]] [[User talk:Alison|☺]] 12:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:56, 29 August 2007
Welcome!
|
My edits and discussions are being deleted
Regarding http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_Commander there is a user that has been deleting my edits and discussions. My first edit there was to warn the public about the dangers of visiting the advertised "World Championship" forum. I know someone who has been harrassed and threatened by the site admin there. My comments were deleted by an anonymous user, who I believe to be a user named Hungrywolf, who is the actual site admin of that forum. Instead of re-adding my comments, I removed the section and link completely and moved my comments to the discussion tab. Ultimately the reason for removing the section and link is because there is no verifiable world champion of this video game. There is no official world championship sponsored by sony online entertainment. And so it is not appropriate to be listing anyone as being world champions of this game or implying that there is actually an official world championship tournament for this game, because there isn't one. The link to the forum was removed because it is just a discussion forum. Actually a private one, where you are unable to post without being previously approved by the site administrator. Refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:EL section "Links normally to be avoided" #10. However, user Hungrywolf has re-added the section again as well as DELETED my comments in the talk page, which I feel is inappropriate. I am going to remove the section and link once again. Blackbeard2k7 08:55, 17 August 2007
- In my opinion, the other editor was right to remove your warning (as it was original research, and you were right to remove the section. However, you should discuss this with the other editors on the talk page if there is disagreement. --Sopoforic 12:59, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
The user Hungrywolf continues to re-add the section and link to his private forums without addressing the issues in the discussion page. What action can be taken to resolve this? Blackbeard2k7 10:38, 17 August 2007
- From what I can see above, it seems as though you are editing according to policy (with the exception of the OR Sopoforic previously mentioned). I would try to contact Hungrywolf directly about this on his talk page, to see if you can negotiate some sort of truce about this. Failing that, the next step in dispute resolution would be to back away for a little bit. The link has been there for a while previously - it's not going to hurt any thing if it's there a little longer. But this gives you and Hungrywolf a little time to relax and possibly become a little more open about the situation. Then you might want to call in a third opinion to help work things out. The one thing you should NOT do is continue to revert each other's edits. While you're acting in good faith, continuing to fight within the article over this is what we call an edit war and could get people blocked if they revert each other more than three times. If you're still having problems after all that, check at WP:DR for the next step in line. Hope this helps. Hersfold (t/a/c) 15:13, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
How long should I wait before bringing in a third opinion? I am not expecting to be able to resolve this dispute directly with Hungrywolf. If you look at his Talk page, you will see that he has already called me many names and made false accusations about me and he does not even know who I am. Also, the user not only re-added the link but also re-added the section. While it is okay for the link to remain until the dispute is resolved, I don't think that this "World Championship" is appropriate for Wiki, as confirmed by the above two helpers. It was re-added to the page again, without any additional commentary in the discussion page. Blackbeard2k7 18:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Can someone tell me what my next course of action should be? I have made complaints about user:Hungrywolf on the article discussion pages and the users talk page, but got no response yet he continues to revert my changes. Blackbeard2k7 00:29, 18 August 2007
- Follow the procedure at WP:DR. If you don't understand one of the steps, you can ask that question, but, as Animum pointed out, it isn't the purpose of {{helpme}} to solve content disputes. We can only guide you to follow the usual dispute resolution procedure. As Jacroe said, the next step is probably WP:RFC. --Sopoforic 04:44, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Your RFC
I will not be certifying the RFC, as I have not had a conflict with this user. We interacted somewhat because I mistook a content dispute for vandalism, but other than that I have not been involved in the dispute at all. Natalie 03:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- You made 3 legitimate edits due to spam and he reverted all 3 of them. You also placed a block warning on his talk page as a result. Do you not consider that a dispute/conflict? Can you clarify what dispute you mistook for vandalism? From everything I've read so far, the user inappropriately accused me of vandalism and you gave him advice regarding such, but that was unrelated to the spam you reverted and warned him about. Blackbeard2k7 04:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- He removed the offending line, and so it is now a content dispute, in which I am not involved. Natalie 19:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- Actually he did remove the offending line, and created a new section called "References" in which he spams the same link 4 times. Blackbeard2k7 19:14, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- He removed the offending line, and so it is now a content dispute, in which I am not involved. Natalie 19:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
I removed the RfC and deleted it. The RfC was not properly certified, as it only met the 2-person threshold after 5 days, not 2 as required. Also, there was no evidence presented for having "tried and failed" to resolve the dispute. I do agree there is problematic behavior there, but it seems it is under control, and RfCs are formal dispute resolution that should only be used when things have gotten really out of hand. Mangojuicetalk 14:41, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
- No problem. I assure you, however, that it will eventually be necessary to re-instate it. Blackbeard2k7 16:42, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Field Commander
If you're going to include commentary like the section you recently put in, it needs to be completely sourced, otherwise it's just going to get removed again. Thanks, ELIMINATORJR 09:31, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Please review this article http://www.netjak.com/review.php/1229. NOTE: I had already posted this message in your talk page, but someone reverted it Here. Blackbeard2k7 18:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Also Please refer to this diff in which Hungrywolf (talk · contribs) has used a sock puppet to remove a comment that I had added to your talk page. This is even after already being warned of removing other peoples comments from talk pages [2]. Proof of his sock puppetry can be found here. Although it has not yet been officially approved, you can see from the evidence I have presented that there is indeed sock puppetry. I would also like to point out that the same sock puppet of Hungrywolf made an edit to an article about Sony confirming the statements I made in the reception section of the Field Commander article. Ironic, isn't it? [3]. Blackbeard2k7 18:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- OK - I'm just going offline now - will look tomorrow. Thanks, ELIMINATORJR 00:22, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
M.U.L.E.
With regard to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M.U.L.E. I have not re-entered any previously deleted links. I have added a link to an article from a gaming magazine site, which I do not believe violates WP:EL. Blackbeard2k7 15:50, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- I looked at the links and agree, which is why I didn't revert it. ELIMINATORJR 15:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Whatever about the suitability of the link ...
You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on M.U.L.E.. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from editing. - Alison ☺ 12:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)