| Revision as of 17:55, 30 December 2010 view sourceEnric Naval (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers30,509 edits →Discretionary sanctions in "Race and Intelligence" articles: and one more comment, and I'm off← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:50, 30 December 2010 view source Professor marginalia (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,362 edits →Discretionary sanctions in "Race and Intelligence" articles: AN/3rrNext edit → | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
| (if you keep commenting in the same line, then you will simply be reported to ]. Once there, you will probably be topic banned from race and intelligence topics, for "causing disruption in an article that is under discretionary sanctions" or something similar. Consider this a friendly warning from someone who has seen other editors follow the same line of comments.) --] (]) 17:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC) | (if you keep commenting in the same line, then you will simply be reported to ]. Once there, you will probably be topic banned from race and intelligence topics, for "causing disruption in an article that is under discretionary sanctions" or something similar. Consider this a friendly warning from someone who has seen other editors follow the same line of comments.) --] (]) 17:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
| ==AN/3RR== | |||
| You have been reported for violating the ]. Any administrator may now choose to block your account. The report is filed here: ] | |||
| - ] (]) 18:50, 30 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 18:50, 30 December 2010
Discretionary sanctions in "Race and Intelligence" articles
See Arbcom decision, race and intelligence articles are under discretionary sanctions. This means that you should be in your best behaviour while editing those articles, and that you should be careful to follow wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
In this edit you are being very harsh with other editors in the page.
You are being reverted because a) people think that you are User:Mikemikev and/or b) you are being very very confrontational and/or c) they already explained in that thread why they think that the proposed edits are not good. The "sock" thing is because people think that you are a sockpuppet of Mikemikev (an alternate account used by Mikemikev to evade the block in his original account). The "troll" thing is because arguments similar to your own arguments have been bandied around for months, and people are starting to think that it's just a tactic to piss off the regular editors of that page.
Please try to be less confrontational. Try to accept that other editors might just not see things your way. --Enric Naval (talk) 16:15, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
And wikipedia is not a forum of discussion, that's why your comments are being removed as rants. Try limiting your comments to succint suggestions of changes, supported by sources. That means making specific suggestions of specific changes.
(if you keep commenting in the same line, then you will simply be reported to the arbitration enforcement board. Once there, you will probably be topic banned from race and intelligence topics, for "causing disruption in an article that is under discretionary sanctions" or something similar. Consider this a friendly warning from someone who has seen other editors follow the same line of comments.) --Enric Naval (talk) 17:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
AN/3RR
You have been reported for violating the three-revert rule. Any administrator may now choose to block your account. The report is filed here: User:BT35 reported by User:Professor marginalia - Professor marginalia (talk) 18:50, 30 December 2010 (UTC)