| Revision as of 18:20, 29 October 2011 editBarek (talk | contribs)83,022 edits block notice← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:13, 29 October 2011 edit undoFactiod (talk | contribs)83 edits →whats all the blocking and hub bub about?: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
| <div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''72 hours''' for ]. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. If you would like to 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.<p>During a dispute, you should first try to ] and seek ]. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek ], and in some cases it may be appropriate to request ]. - ] <small>(] • ])</small> - 18:20, 29 October 2011 (UTC)</p></div><!-- Template:uw-ewblock --> | <div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''72 hours''' for ]. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. If you would like to 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.<p>During a dispute, you should first try to ] and seek ]. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek ], and in some cases it may be appropriate to request ]. - ] <small>(] • ])</small> - 18:20, 29 October 2011 (UTC)</p></div><!-- Template:uw-ewblock --> | ||
| == whats all the blocking and hub bub about? == | |||
| As a Patent Investigator and Intellectual Property Prosecutor, with no ownership in the device or its IP and I am in the processing of updating the record of CueCat and its invention, history and Intellectual Property Record. For a matter of official notification here, the record to date (the one that is currently viewable to the public) is misleading, grossly factually incorrect, liable to the pre-existing company, its technology and its historic record, and – in fact – was posted by a rival technology to the pre-existent company. I can submit over 6500 pages of government, federal and public documents to verify the account, facts and record of the device known as CueCat, based on my theses and an upcoming research project and book. In trying to update the record, I found that almost immediately several people (one using multiple identities) were reverting back to the factually incorrect record of the device and its creation and history. What is being portrayed is incorrect information and the record must be corrected. I did get confused when a bot or person was communicating with me, and thus ended up banned. | |||
| What can I do to get this gross error corrected? I am prepared to send the document source of 6531 pages directly to Wiki for legal review. But seems the community at large watching (55 users) this topic are doing so with ill and damaging intent. I have done my homework, understand the device, its creation, its intellectual property, its impact and its legacy and need the record updated and the page LOCKED if needed to avoid salacious and malicious. None of our “talks” to the contributors were addressed. Please advise | |||
Revision as of 19:13, 29 October 2011
October 2011
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on CueCat. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring states:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Binksternet (talk) 18:05, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello Factiod. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article CueCat, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Misplaced Pages's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
- editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
- participating in deletion discussions about articles related to you, your organization or its competitors; and
- linking to the Misplaced Pages article or website of your organization in other articles (see Misplaced Pages:Spam).
Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.
For information on how to contribute to Misplaced Pages when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:12, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button 
or 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 18:12, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. - Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:20, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
whats all the blocking and hub bub about?
As a Patent Investigator and Intellectual Property Prosecutor, with no ownership in the device or its IP and I am in the processing of updating the record of CueCat and its invention, history and Intellectual Property Record. For a matter of official notification here, the record to date (the one that is currently viewable to the public) is misleading, grossly factually incorrect, liable to the pre-existing company, its technology and its historic record, and – in fact – was posted by a rival technology to the pre-existent company. I can submit over 6500 pages of government, federal and public documents to verify the account, facts and record of the device known as CueCat, based on my theses and an upcoming research project and book. In trying to update the record, I found that almost immediately several people (one using multiple identities) were reverting back to the factually incorrect record of the device and its creation and history. What is being portrayed is incorrect information and the record must be corrected. I did get confused when a bot or person was communicating with me, and thus ended up banned. What can I do to get this gross error corrected? I am prepared to send the document source of 6531 pages directly to Wiki for legal review. But seems the community at large watching (55 users) this topic are doing so with ill and damaging intent. I have done my homework, understand the device, its creation, its intellectual property, its impact and its legacy and need the record updated and the page LOCKED if needed to avoid salacious and malicious. None of our “talks” to the contributors were addressed. Please advise