| Revision as of 02:35, 20 June 2012 edit79.182.199.172 (talk) →June 2012← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:21, 20 June 2012 edit undoMastCell (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators43,155 edits →Blocked: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| :You haven't replied to my question at the article talk page, your page, my page, etc. I am participating in a ] discussion, and if you have nothing to say about the content, please let me know now, and I will consider you to have withdrawn from your argument at the talk page, and revert the change you did. | :You haven't replied to my question at the article talk page, your page, my page, etc. I am participating in a ] discussion, and if you have nothing to say about the content, please let me know now, and I will consider you to have withdrawn from your argument at the talk page, and revert the change you did. | ||
| ::I see you finally replied in the talk page, I will read your reply now. | ::I see you finally replied in the talk page, I will read your reply now. | ||
| == Blocked == | |||
| <div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''24 hours''' for ] and ]. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may ] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx" argument. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here ~~~~''}}, but you should read the ] first. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 04:21, 20 June 2012 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:uw-block --> | |||
| You avoided a sanction for a clear 3RR violation , largely because the reviewing admins wanted to give you a chance to stop edit-warring and try to convince people on the talk page. Given the resumption of edit-warring, I've blocked your IP for 24 hours. When the block expires, please use the talk page and try to reach a consensus ''before'' repeatedly reinserting the same disputed material. It's clear that there are significant good-faith objections to the material, and those need to be addressed ''without'' concurrent attempts to force the material into the article. I would strongly consider limiting yourself to one edit (or set of contiguous edits) to the article per day. If your edits truly have consensus, then you don't need to keep edit-warring. If they ''don't'' have consensus, then you need to follow the steps outlined ] rather than continuing to edit-war. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 04:21, 20 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 04:21, 20 June 2012
June 2012
This is a final warning. Your behaviour in reverting against the consensus of several other editors and against the policy documented at WP:SYNTH in the X-ray computed tomography article, as well as your "wall of text" swamping of the talk page is tendentious editing and will lead to your editing privileges being withdrawn if you continue. Switching IPs to evade scrutiny will not work as IP ranges as just as easily blocked. As is made clear in WP:SOAP, Misplaced Pages is not he place for you to campaign to expose the problems you imagine exist with CT scans. --RexxS (talk) 02:16, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
- You haven't replied to my question at the article talk page, your page, my page, etc. I am participating in a WP:BOLD discussion, and if you have nothing to say about the content, please let me know now, and I will consider you to have withdrawn from your argument at the talk page, and revert the change you did.
- I see you finally replied in the talk page, I will read your reply now.
Blocked
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. MastCell 04:21, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
You avoided a sanction for a clear 3RR violation here, largely because the reviewing admins wanted to give you a chance to stop edit-warring and try to convince people on the talk page. Given the resumption of edit-warring, I've blocked your IP for 24 hours. When the block expires, please use the talk page and try to reach a consensus before repeatedly reinserting the same disputed material. It's clear that there are significant good-faith objections to the material, and those need to be addressed without concurrent attempts to force the material into the article. I would strongly consider limiting yourself to one edit (or set of contiguous edits) to the article per day. If your edits truly have consensus, then you don't need to keep edit-warring. If they don't have consensus, then you need to follow the steps outlined here rather than continuing to edit-war. MastCell 04:21, 20 June 2012 (UTC)