Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
Rosie, you're just off your block and already adding data to episode lists and using sources that do not contain the data you've added. There's no rush to add these data: please be patient and wait for accurate sources. Futon Critic is ''estimating'' dates for episodes with no corresponding titles; neither USA nor ABC announces air dates and titles more than two weeks in advance as a rule. ] (]) 19:42, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Rosie, you're just off your block and already adding data to episode lists and using sources that do not contain the data you've added. There's no rush to add these data: please be patient and wait for accurate sources. Futon Critic is ''estimating'' dates for episodes with no corresponding titles; neither USA nor ABC announces air dates and titles more than two weeks in advance as a rule. ] (]) 19:42, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
You've been unbanned for, what, some four hours, and are back at it. Adding wrong info with references that do no contain the info you try to back up with them and using unreliable sources on Castle and White collar pages like ] said above. Changing the ], by changing section headers you break links that point towards it, which I stated before and now again, ''twice''. And again, you just revert it without explanation. Please stop it. There is no reason for the change and in the process you disrupt links that point toward the section. You say you understand your error, your behavior makes it seem you don't, or you just don't care. From the little German I know I understand you were banned first then and lastly before being banned for the ''same'' reason on the German wikipedia. Midst the temporary bans you decided to come to the English wikipedia and continue the same behavior that was not tolerated there and resulted you in being banned indefinitely. ] <sup>(]•])</sup> 22:15, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Revision as of 22:15, 8 November 2009
List of NCIS: Los Angeles episodes
This edit, for which you have provided no edit summary, makes no sense. The citation for episode 4 shows the title as "Killshot", not "Search and Destroy" with an airdate of October 13, 2009, while the citation for episode 5 shows the title as "Search and Destroy", not "Killshot". --AussieLegend (talk) 20:23, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Edit war on Castle episodes page
Are you and Xeworlebi finished warring over the format for the tables on the Castle episode pages so I can go put in the references? Please let me know when you two are finished being right, so I don't have to play a 3RR card (which you two have both serially violated) to get it stopped in order to get the references in place. I'm not even going to attempt to do them until you two grow up and knock it off. Drmargi (talk) 11:16, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
October 2009
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of Castle episodes. 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 several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. AussieLegend (talk) 11:48, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Nice try but no dice, Rosie. TV.com is not a reliable sources for airdates, summaries or anything much in advance of an episode's broadcast (or little after) as it's entirely fan-submitted. Moreover, they DO NOT have the airdates you source to them. Even if they did, they would be unreliable as fans simply guess at airdates or source them to casting call websites, which assume airdates by production order. You have no foundation for those air dates.
You are becoming an increasingly tendentious editor. Your refusal to discuss edits or to engage in the consensus process, a core value of Misplaced Pages, will rapidly turn editors against you and cast you in an adversarial light. You are strongly encouraged to accept that not every edit you make will stand, you're not always right, and it's not the obligation of every editor to simple accept what you say as true, accurate and final. Your actions on the Castle episode pages have gotten the page locked, cost the page some valuable edits, and generally created a hostile environment in concert with another controlling editor. You may want step back and rethink your approach to editing, or be prepared to face the consequences. Drmargi (talk) 20:50, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Please stop your tendentious edits on the White Collar page. Again, this is a warning against tendentious editing. To make an edit and declare it right is insulting and inappropriate. Please discuss and reach consensus before reverting again, or you may be blocked from editing. Drmargi (talk) 03:30, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to List of The Suite Life on Deck episodes, as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see Help:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.' Thank you. AussieLegend (talk) 14:36, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, you may not know that Misplaced Pages has a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Using different styles throughout the encyclopedia, as you did in List of The Mentalist episodes, makes it harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. AussieLegend (talk) 14:40, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello 1989 Rosie. Unless you start to engage in discussions, you'll soon be blocked from editing. This place is meant to be collaborative: if two people disagree on what an article should do, the right thing to do is to stop editing, discuss and come to a consensus. Repeatedly undoing other people's work is not very friendly. Cheers, henrik•talk19:59, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
To answer your question "Why a discussion ?" here since I have no intention in getting into an edit war with you again. Because people ask it, and Henrik says it great "the right thing to do is to stop editing, discuss and come to a consensus", but you seem to have no intention to "do the right ting". The reason for change and repeated reversal on the List of V (2009 TV series) episodes is beyond me as you are breaking links toward the page =m which I have stated yet you keep ignoring it. Xeworlebi21:09, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Well, engaging in discussion is the only way that you'll be able to make your changes stick in wikipedia (or be able to continue editing at all). Please acknowledge this before resuming editing. I've blocked for from editing for a day so that you can learn more about how we do things here before disrupting further. Please read The basic principles of wikipedia, especially the fourth point. henrik•talk21:11, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Revert without discussion
Rosie, you're right back to your same editing practices. You have been asked repeatedly not to revert edits on the episode pages for Castle and White Collar, and refuse to do so. You've just had one block for disruptive editing, and are right back at it. Please stop, recognize that your way is not the only way to edit, and engage in consensus building. Drmargi (talk) 02:29, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Rosie, why a discussion? Because we have a process that settles disagreements by discussion. Your constant reverting of other editors' edits without discussion does nothing but cause problems and edit wars. You've been blocked for failing to do this once. You're on your way to another block for the same reason. When we disagree, we STOP EDITING and START TALKING. There are THREE editors on the Castle page who do not agree with your edits, and yet you refuse to discuss them in order to reach consensus we can all live with. That's not how it's done here. Please read WP:CONSENSUS. Drmargi (talk) 13:47, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
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.
I would be happy to unblock (or have any admin unblock), if you acknowledge that you understand the problem and promise to stop. If people disagree, you stop editing and start discussing. henrik•talk14:08, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
WP:Other stuff exists is a flimsy argument at best, and not at all a reason to revert others edits. And yes, when you make a change to the page and someone reverts it and asks for a discussion, you should engage in the discussion. Besides that, and don't take this as an offense, you seem to not be all that well versed in English, there are some 260 different versions of wikipedia, I'm sure there's one in your native language. It's not forbidden to edit on a non-well-versed-in-the-language version of wikipedia, but it makes discussing really difficult, and I feel it is a reason why you don't. Xeworlebi14:29, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Regarding your request to be unblocked, the reason for the block is not about putting TBA or N/A. You were blocked on both occasions because your editing was disruptive. If you change something in an article and somebody reverts your edit, you don't just revert that edit without any explanation as you did, for example, at List of White Collar episodes. You need to explain why you made the change. If somebody then reverts again, you need to discuss the changes. Simply reverting again, is edit warring and is inappropriate. Not all revisions to articles require discussion, but if you don't use edit summaries to explain your edits, or your changes are opposed more than once, then you do need to discuss them. If you aren't willing to discuss the changes, then you shouldn't continue making them.
For the record, I believe that your change to "TBA" was entirely appropriate, as was this edit to List of Castle episodes. This later edit to the same article was not. You needed to explain your reasons for the change. Many of your edits have been valid, but if you aren't willing or able to discuss "problem" edits, you're only going to continue to be blocked. Misplaced Pages is a collaborative effort and you need to sometimes discuss things with editors. You certainly need to acknowledge that you understand this, as was previously requested, or you're going to remain blocked. It's up to you. You can't simply continue to ignore requests to discuss issues that other editors have with your edits. --AussieLegend (talk) 16:31, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
{{Unblock|I´m understand my erorr and please unblocked me?}}
Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):
Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.
Castle and White Collar Episodes: Sources
Rosie, you're just off your block and already adding data to episode lists and using sources that do not contain the data you've added. There's no rush to add these data: please be patient and wait for accurate sources. Futon Critic is estimating dates for episodes with no corresponding titles; neither USA nor ABC announces air dates and titles more than two weeks in advance as a rule. Drmargi (talk) 19:42, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
You've been unbanned for, what, some four hours, and are back at it. Adding wrong info with references that do no contain the info you try to back up with them and using unreliable sources on Castle and White collar pages like Drmargi said above. Changing the List of V (2009 TV series) episodes, by changing section headers you break links that point towards it, which I stated before and now again, twice. And again, you just revert it without explanation. Please stop it. There is no reason for the change and in the process you disrupt links that point toward the section. You say you understand your error, your behavior makes it seem you don't, or you just don't care. From the little German I know I understand you were banned first 6 hours then 3 days and lastly 1 month before being banned indefinitely for the same reason on the German wikipedia. Midst the temporary bans you decided to come to the English wikipedia and continue the same behavior that was not tolerated there and resulted you in being banned indefinitely. Xeworlebi22:15, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of Castle episodes. 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 several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. AussieLegend (talk) 11:48, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Three Rivers (TV series). Alansohn (talk) 12:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to List of NCIS: Los Angeles episodes. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Misplaced Pages:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. AussieLegend (talk) 15:56, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did at List of Castle episodes, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Misplaced Pages:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.
Please stop your tendentious edits on the White Collar page. Again, this is a warning against tendentious editing. To make an edit and declare it right is insulting and inappropriate. Please discuss and reach consensus before reverting again, or you may be blocked from editing. Drmargi (talk) 03:30, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
