Steven Crossin (talk | contribs) →Dispute resolution: cmt |
→Dispute resolution: typo |
||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
'''PS:''' The same warning applies to the article [[List of Nobel laureates by university affiliation]] where you also appear to be engaged in an edit war and to have violated the 3-revert rule.<br> |
'''PS:''' The same warning applies to the article [[List of Nobel laureates by university affiliation]] where you also appear to be engaged in an edit war and to have violated the 3-revert rule.<br> |
||
[[User:David_J_Wilson|David Wilson]] <small>([[User talk:David_J_Wilson|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/David_J_Wilson|cont]])</small> 15:24, 5 July 2011 (UTC) |
[[User:David_J_Wilson|David Wilson]] <small>([[User talk:David_J_Wilson|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/David_J_Wilson|cont]])</small> 15:24, 5 July 2011 (UTC) |
||
== Dispute resolution == |
|||
Listen, since you are feeling so aggrieved by having three Wikipedia users cornering you as a relatively new user, I am going to offer you one last courteous explanation of what is wrong with your edits on 'Golden Triangle (UK universities)'. |
|||
#In [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Golden_Triangle_(UK_universities)&diff=437706189&oldid=437704902 this] edit, I '''corrected the error''' that you brought up, in addition to removing the [[WP:PEACOCK]]ery and irrelevant list of universities [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Golden_Triangle_(UK_universities)&diff=prev&oldid=437704902]. So stop accusing me of repeatedly restoring incorrect information. |
|||
#After the error was corrected, you still reverted back to your version [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Golden_Triangle_(UK_universities)&diff=437780694&oldid=437706189] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Golden_Triangle_(UK_universities)&diff=437789248&oldid=437781983], which is [[WP:DISRUPTIVE]] behavior. |
|||
#The [[WP:PEACOCK]]ery I am referring to (as I have already explained to you [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Golden_Triangle_(UK_universities)&diff=437781704&oldid=437705337] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Yk_Yk_Yk&diff=437790796&oldid=437790038]) is this: ''Indeed, there are more famous former students associated with the individual constituent colleges of both Oxford and Cambridge than the entirety of most other universities worldwide. With that said, it is arguably considered throughout the world, like Oxford and London, as the very most greatest university in the world and the home of the elite-elite.'' Have you actually read the link [[WP:PEACOCK]] to see ''exactly'' why words like "the very most greatest" should not be used in Wikipedia? Yeah true, they have the most Nobel laureates, but that in no way translates to being "the very most greatest university in the world." |
|||
#I am also opposed to you adding the list of universities by Nobel Prize affiliates in the ''Cambridge University'' section in the 'Golden Triangle (UK universities)' article. I have already told you that it is '''irrelevant to the 'Golden Triangle (UK universities)' article''' [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Golden_Triangle_(UK_universities)&diff=437781704&oldid=437705337] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Yk_Yk_Yk&diff=437790796&oldid=437790038]. So stop accusing me of saying you added unnecessary information to 'List of Nobel laureates by university affiliation'. I have been completely uninvolved in that article, and the [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Golden Triangle (UK universities)|dispute resolution]] I brought up '''is only related to 'Golden Triangle (UK universities){{'}}'''. |
|||
Your retaliatory [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#List of Nobel laureates by university affiliation, Golden Triangle (UK universities)|dispute resolution request]] is riddled with [[WP:CIVIL|uncivil]] accusations of deception and victimization and I suggest you remove it. Note that I have never engaged in any name-calling apart from describing your actions as disruptive. |
|||
And lastly, your comments [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rangoon11&diff=prev&oldid=437978033] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Yk_Yk_Yk&diff=prev&oldid=438009500] inviting other users to the dispute resolution "arena" suggests that you are deliberately kicking up a fuss to make a mockery of Wikipedia. - [[User:Yk Yk Yk|Yk<sup>3</sup>]] <small>'''[[User talk:Yk Yk Yk|talk]] ~ [[Special:Contributions/Yk Yk Yk|contrib]]'''</small> 11:45, 6 July 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:11, 6 July 2011
Welcome
|
Dispute resolution
Hi, I've named you as an involved user at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Golden Triangle (UK universities). - Yk3 talk ~ contrib 01:15, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed you created another posting on the dispute resolution noticeboard for this issue, but it's already an open issue. I'd advised you to comment on the already open thread. Thanks. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 02:18, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
3-Revert Rule Warning
You appear to be currently engaged in an edit war on the article Golden Triangle (UK universities). You should be made aware that Wikipedia's policy against edit warring includes a strict rule—the 3-revert rule (3RR)—which prohibits an editor from reverting any other editors' contributions to a single article more than 3 times within any 24-hour period. You have already violated this rule on the above-mentioned article (first revert, 11:37, July 4th; second revert; third revert; fourth revert; fifth revert, 00:15,July 5th). If you continue to edit war you may be reported to the edit warring noticeboard, which is likely to result in your being blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Since your edits have been disputed by 2 separate editors, and supported by no others as far as I can see, Wikipedia's policy requires you to seek consensus for your edits by engaging in its dispute resolution procedures. One of the editors with whom you are in dispute has already opened a discussion on the dispute resolution noticeboard, as indicated in his notice above. Please respond to other editors' objections by engaging in proper discussion either there or on the article's talk page. Simply insisting that you are right and the other editors are wrong is unacceptable—you need to provide convincing arguments that the other editors' objections are unfounded.
I have reverted your latest sequence of edits to the article. In my opinion you would be wise to avoid re-reverting until you have convinced the editors with whom you are in dispute that your edits are genuine improvements to the article.
David Wilson (talk · cont) 13:17, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
PS: The same warning applies to the article List of Nobel laureates by university affiliation where you also appear to be engaged in an edit war and to have violated the 3-revert rule.
David Wilson (talk · cont) 15:24, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Dispute resolution
Listen, since you are feeling so aggrieved by having three Wikipedia users cornering you as a relatively new user, I am going to offer you one last courteous explanation of what is wrong with your edits on 'Golden Triangle (UK universities)'.
- In this edit, I corrected the error that you brought up, in addition to removing the WP:PEACOCKery and irrelevant list of universities [1]. So stop accusing me of repeatedly restoring incorrect information.
- After the error was corrected, you still reverted back to your version [2] [3], which is WP:DISRUPTIVE behavior.
- The WP:PEACOCKery I am referring to (as I have already explained to you [4] [5]) is this: Indeed, there are more famous former students associated with the individual constituent colleges of both Oxford and Cambridge than the entirety of most other universities worldwide. With that said, it is arguably considered throughout the world, like Oxford and London, as the very most greatest university in the world and the home of the elite-elite. Have you actually read the link WP:PEACOCK to see exactly why words like "the very most greatest" should not be used in Wikipedia? Yeah true, they have the most Nobel laureates, but that in no way translates to being "the very most greatest university in the world."
- I am also opposed to you adding the list of universities by Nobel Prize affiliates in the Cambridge University section in the 'Golden Triangle (UK universities)' article. I have already told you that it is irrelevant to the 'Golden Triangle (UK universities)' article [6] [7]. So stop accusing me of saying you added unnecessary information to 'List of Nobel laureates by university affiliation'. I have been completely uninvolved in that article, and the dispute resolution I brought up is only related to 'Golden Triangle (UK universities)'.
Your retaliatory dispute resolution request is riddled with uncivil accusations of deception and victimization and I suggest you remove it. Note that I have never engaged in any name-calling apart from describing your actions as disruptive.
And lastly, your comments [8] [9] inviting other users to the dispute resolution "arena" suggests that you are deliberately kicking up a fuss to make a mockery of Wikipedia. - Yk3 talk ~ contrib 11:45, 6 July 2011 (UTC)