Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:56, 23 June 2009

Witch Hunt vol. 1

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on West Ridge Academy. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. --Rider 21:22, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on West Ridge Academy. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. --Rider 21:27, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

One more violation and you will be blocked; please stop now. --Rider 21:30, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Witchhunt vol 2

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Misplaced Pages. However, please know that editors do not own articles and should respect the work of their fellow contributors on West Ridge Academy. If you create or edit an article, know that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.--Rider 21:27, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Objection to Warnings

Please do not use warnings punitively to discourage editing articles. You are abusing the wikipedia dispute resolution process and have been reported for such. In addition, an arbitration request has been filed. Thank you. --DoyleCB (talk) 21:46, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Your edit history is easily followed and demonstrates your history of demonstrating OWN and violating 3RR. That is clear for all admins to follow. I hope you are able to improve your editing. Cheers. --Rider 02:47, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Censorship in Action, chp. 1

Please stop abusing warning or blocking templates, as you did to User:Storm Rider. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages.

Using warnings as a way of retaliating against those who monitor vandalism and those editors who consistently ignore Misplaced Pages policies will cause you to be blocked. You are coming very close to being blocked today. Cheers. --Rider 02:48, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Regarding reversions made on June 14 2009 to West Ridge Academy

The duration of the block is 24 hours. William M. Connolley (talk) 08:51, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

{{]}} Your block has already expired. J.delanoy_adds 20:12, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Witch Hunt vol. 1

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on West Ridge Academy. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. --Rider 01:20, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Blocked again

I've blocked you again, this time for 48h, for disruptive editing at West Ridge Academy.

I also note that you have civility issues that aggravate the situation. For example this edit to User_talk:Storm_Rider Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --DoyleCB (talk) 04:41, 18 June 2009 appears to be a completely unjustified accusation of vandalism. I cannot see any evidence of vandalism there. If you care to nominate a diff there that you believe is clear and obvious evidence of vandalism, please do.

Several things seem quite clear here, so I shall offer you some advice.

Firstly, you seem to do nothing but edit WRA, about which you obviously care passionately. This WP:SPA approach leads inevitably to suspicions of WP:COI.

Secondly, you are having problems realising that your conduct is problematic, and in interacting harmoniously with other editors (unlike me, obviously, a model of sweetness and light). I very strongly urge you to slow down and work out how this place works. Causing more friction will not advance your "cause" and will only lead to a more lengthy block.

And lastly, since I'm sure others are watching here, can all editors please ensure that the heated discussion at WRA remains strictly focussed on the edits not the editors and scrupulously civil at all times William M. Connolley (talk) 06:49, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

DoyleCB (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I really hope you can provide at least one example of a disruptive edit that I made so that this block doesn't look entirely like retaliation for reporting user Storm Rider for abusiveness. I would really love to believe that there is a good reason for this block (other than pissing off another editor). Please "wow" me. --DoyleCB (talk) 18:23, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Edit warring is apparent. Consider yourself wowed. Toddst1 (talk) 21:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

June 2009

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you delete or blank page content or templates from Misplaced Pages, as you did to West Ridge Academy, you will be blocked from editing. This is specifically in reference to this edit. Toddst1 (talk) 18:26, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Pardon me, but I removed a comment that was stated twice in the article. I also brought it to the talk page of the article. If this behavior, which appears to be bullying continues, I will be forced to notify the administrators. Thanks :) --DoyleCB (talk) 18:28, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

That's why constructive editors use edit summaries. You should use them. Toddst1 (talk) 18:31, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

That's one way to say, "Oops. I made a mistake." Jesus Christ, who peed in your cheerios Todd? Maybe you should go for a walk outside. --DoyleCB (talk) 18:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Consider this a final warning for making personal attacks. Comments such as this are not constructive. Toddst1 (talk) 18:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

What nonsense. I edited your own personal attack against me! Okay Todd, you want to be a bully. ANI board here we come. I don't know why you have to be so uncivil. Certainly you are aware of WP:Civil, aren't you? I would strongly suggest a walk outside to calm down.--DoyleCB (talk) 18:43, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Please stop reverting edits on my talk page. Toddst1 (talk) 18:49, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Please stop editing my comments on your talk page inappropriately. --DoyleCB (talk) 18:51, 23 June 2009 (UTC)