Content deleted Content added
User has submitted an unblock appeal on UTRS (Peachy 2.0 (alpha 8)) |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 24:
== Thanks ==
Thanks for your edits on [[Northern Raqqa offensive (November 2016–present)]]. Feel free to join us and chat with us on the article's talk page :) --[[User:Yug|Yug]] [[User talk:Yug|<small><
== [[2017 Fort Lauderdale airport shooting]] ==
Line 107:
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Involved admins|uninvolved]] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|purpose of Wikipedia]], our [[:Category:Wikipedia conduct policies|standards of behavior]], or relevant [[Wikipedia:List of policies|policies]]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as [[Wikipedia:Editing restrictions#Types of restrictions|editing restrictions]], [[Wikipedia:Banning policy#Types of bans|bans]], or [[WP:Blocking policy|blocks]]. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
:I already knew about it. Relax dude, I just talked and did nothing else. [[User:MonsterHunter32|MonsterHunter32]] ([[User talk:MonsterHunter32#top|talk]]) 08:42, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Line 121:
As for "calm down", I have looked again at the RfC and I have no idea what you're talking about. The participants seem quite calm to me.'
This is just one editor's view, take it to heart or reject it, as always. Happy editing.
== Reference errors on 22 January ==
Line 220:
== Please stop edit warring ==
You seem to be confused about what you're reading, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2017_Saint_Petersburg_Metro_bombing&diff=773717856&oldid=773717833], the reports are not contradictory. [[Kazakhstan]] is ''in'' Central Asia, and there was only one attacker. Also we always state ''attacker'' not ''suspect'' as one can't place a criminal charge against a dead person. <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">— [[User:Coffee|<big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee</big>]] // [[user talk:Coffee|<
:I don't wish to nitpick, but I have an Ordnance Survey Map of Europe dated 1999 on my office wall, and part of Kazakhstan west of the [[Ural River]] is shown as part of Europe. [[User:Ritchie333|<b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b>]] [[User talk:Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk)</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)</sup>]] 13:13, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Line 226:
[[File:Stop hand nuvola.svg|30px|left|alt=Stop icon]] Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|edit war]]. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines|talk page]] to work toward making a version that represents [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See [[Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle|BRD]] for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant [[Wikipedia:Noticeboards|noticeboard]] or seek [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary [[Wikipedia:Protection policy|page protection]].
'''Being involved in an edit war can result in your being [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked from editing]]'''—especially if you violate the [[Wikipedia:Edit warring#The three-revert rule|three-revert rule]], which states that an editor must not perform more than three [[Help:Reverting|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.<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">— [[User:Coffee|<big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee</big>]] // [[user talk:Coffee|<
<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> [[File:Stop x nuvola with clock.svg|40px|left|alt=Stop icon with clock]] You have been '''[[WP:Blocking policy|blocked]]''' from editing for a period of '''24 hours''' for [[WP:Edit warring|edit warring]], as you did at [[:2017 Saint Petersburg Metro bombing]]. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to [[WP:Five pillars|make useful contributions]]. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may [[WP:Appealing a block|request an unblock]] by first reading the [[WP:Guide to appealing blocks|guide to appealing blocks]], then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx|" code. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here ~~~~''}}.<p>During a dispute, you should first try to [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines|discuss controversial changes]] and seek [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]]. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]], and in some cases it may be appropriate to request [[Wikipedia:Protection policy|page protection]]. – '''[[User:Juliancolton|<span style="font-family:Script MT Bold;color:#36648B">Juliancolton</span>]]''' | [[User_talk:Juliancolton|<sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:gray;text-shadow:gray .2em .18em .12em">''Talk''</span></sup>]] 01:07, 4 April 2017 (UTC)</p></div><!-- Template:uw-ewblock -->
Line 306:
:I usually am not focused on editing articles relating to Israel, only remember one I edited long ago and don't understand why you are bringing it to me. It's better you take it to ANI. I don't have the time these days to edit any article. The small time i do have, I use it to edit Mosul battle. Other users will be able to help you if you think the edits of someone else is wrong. I may decide to check on it still though. Nothing's sure. [[User:MonsterHunter32|MonsterHunter32]] ([[User talk:MonsterHunter32#top|talk]]) 04:58, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
::FYI this is an IP sock of AndresHerutJaim. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User talk:Nableezy|<
== Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion ==
Line 318:
{{unblock reviewed | 1=I already issued an apology for my mistake and I didn't realise it would be seen as such. Even per that standard, I reverted 2 times. The complainant, who himself has edit-warred in the past and otherwise has been in disruptive behavior, too withdrew his complaint. Why wasn't that considered? | decline = The battle of mosul article is under 1rr restriction - One revert - not 2, not 3. You have edited the talkpage - so I believe that you have read this very prominent notice at the top. [[User:SQL|<span style="font-size:7pt;color: #fff;background:#900;border:2px solid #999">SQL</span>]][[User talk:SQL|<sup style="font-size: 5pt;color:#999">Query me!</sup>]] 03:24, 15 July 2017 (UTC)}}
*You shouldn't use the unblock template to make inquiries. If you have questions you should ping the appropriate parties or use the admin help template. You are risking a decline by leaving the request as is. [[User:Tide rolls|'''<span style="color:White;background:darkRed">Tide</span>''']][[User talk:Tide rolls|'''<span style="color:darkRed">rolls
Hey sorry, but can't the inquiry be a form of pointing out what's flawed in logic in the blocker's decision? Just saying. And [[User:SQL}}
Line 516:
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Involved admins|uninvolved]] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|purpose of Wikipedia]], our [[:Category:Wikipedia conduct policies|standards of behavior]], or relevant [[Wikipedia:List of policies|policies]]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as [[Wikipedia:Editing restrictions#Types of restrictions|editing restrictions]], [[Wikipedia:Banning policy#Types of bans|bans]], or [[WP:Blocking policy|blocks]]. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
:I made only one revert after we talked because I thought the reasons of it being "too much speculation" as not satisfying. But anyway thank you. [[User:MonsterHunter32|MonsterHunter32]] ([[User talk:MonsterHunter32#top|talk]]) 20:56, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Line 617:
{{UTRS-unblock-user|21459|May 08, 2018 14:22:28|closed}}--[[User:UTRSBot|UTRSBot]] ([[User talk:UTRSBot|talk]]) 14:22, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
{{UTRS-unblock-user|23406|Nov 28, 2018 16:08:31|closed}}--[[User:UTRSBot|UTRSBot]] ([[User talk:UTRSBot|talk]]) 16:08, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
{{UTRS-unblock-user|23416|Nov 29, 2018 03:09:25|closed}}--[[User:UTRSBot|UTRSBot]] ([[User talk:UTRSBot|talk]]) 03:09, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
| |||