| Revision as of 16:58, 26 July 2009 editWildhartlivie (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers55,910 edits Warning: Potentially violating the three revert rule on John Dillinger. using TW← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:15, 26 July 2009 edit undoWildhartlivie (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers55,910 edits →July 2009Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| == July 2009 == | == July 2009 == | ||
| ] You currently appear to be engaged in an ]{{#if:John Dillinger|  according to the reverts you have made on ]}}. Note that the ] 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 ]. If you continue, '''you may be ] from editing'''. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a ] among editors. If necessary, pursue ]. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> |
] You currently appear to be engaged in an ]{{#if:John Dillinger|  according to the reverts you have made on ]}}. Note that the ] 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 ]. If you continue, '''you may be ] from editing'''. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a ] among editors. If necessary, pursue ]. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> | ||
| So how productive is templating? You've actually violated ] since your very first removal of this content was a revert from your first change on July 13. revert removed the content, which had been returned after you removed it . Your was this one, your and then . In fact, rather than template you for it, I attempted to discuss this with you, as the template suggests, and actually asked you twice to discuss this, only to be met with bad faith snarky edit summaries and removal of my attempts under a bad faith edit summary referencing removing rants. An administrator has now reverted your last removal and if you persist with this, I will file a notice with ] since any good faith attempts to discuss this with you has been met with rebuff. You obviously do not have a clear understanding of why this "helpful hidden comment", as ], the administrator, called is necessary and don't care. Careful now, if you revert this again, I will take it to ]. ] (]) 16:58, 26 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:15, 26 July 2009
July 2009
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on John Dillinger. 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.
So how productive is templating? You've actually violated WP:3RR since your very first removal of this content was a revert from your first change on July 13. Your first revert removed the content, which had been returned after you removed it . Your second revert was this one, your third revert and then your fourth revert. In fact, rather than template you for it, I attempted to discuss this with you, as the template suggests, and actually asked you twice to discuss this, only to be met with bad faith snarky edit summaries and removal of my attempts under a bad faith edit summary referencing removing rants. An administrator has now reverted your last removal and if you persist with this, I will file a notice with WP:AN/I since any good faith attempts to discuss this with you has been met with rebuff. You obviously do not have a clear understanding of why this "helpful hidden comment", as Garion96, the administrator, called is necessary and don't care. Careful now, if you revert this again, I will take it to WP:AN/I. Wildhartlivie (talk) 16:58, 26 July 2009 (UTC)