User talk:Rejedef: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 14:53, 29 December 2011 editToddy1 (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers48,714 edits There is a report on your edits on Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring ← Previous edit		Revision as of 02:05, 30 December 2011 edit undoQwyrxian (talk \| contribs)57,186 edits You have been blocked from editing. (TW)Next edit →
Line 74:		Line 74:

	There is a report on your edits on ]--] (]) 14:53, 29 December 2011 (UTC)		There is a report on your edits on ]--] (]) 14:53, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

			== December 2011 ==
			<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''24 hours''' for ]. While you did not cross ], you are definitely edit warring, because several different editors have told you that you need to work on this carefully on the article's talk page, including getting all of your references in line first. Additionally, you inappropriately called another editor's removals vandalism, which they very clearly were not (see ]). It's time for you to stop trying to force your version into the articles and instead work to develop a consensus. Note that some of the editors do think that some portion of this belongs in the article, but that it needs to be done carefully and neutrally.. 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. ] (]) 02:05, 30 December 2011 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:uw-block -->

Revision as of 02:05, 30 December 2011

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Welcome to my discussion board. Last time it was cleared and archived on 20th of December 2011.

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Human rights in Poland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Polish (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:30, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

A late welcome

Hello and Welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions to this 💕. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking

if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field with your edits. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Of course, some of this - or maybe a lot of this, you already know. But it's such a great reference piece I thought I'd pass it along to use or not as you choose. Happy editing!--CaroleHenson (talk) 11:50, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: Edit a page • Upload and use images • Create your first article Intuitive guide to Misplaced Pages • Article Creation Wizard
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Help desk: A Wiki Styled page to ask questions on Help directory: A comprehensive list-style help contents page
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Misplaced Pages is not • Biographies of living persons List of policies • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • List of guidelines Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Simplified manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Peer review • Featured content
Miscellaneous
User pages • Talk pages Awards a registered contributor can achieve and award Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Jugendamt

I put a redirect from the Jugendamt article to Children's rights#German law so that it will get more visability. I also found an incredible source, focusing upon the current situation and human rights violations. Does the new information that gets across the points that you were looking to make?--CaroleHenson (talk) 11:53, 27 December 2011 (UTC) It was supposed to be very basic or an agency which was my main point. Please keep reliable resources. I do not think that a governmental organisation should have just a redirect to a small part of another article, therefore I just undid your revision. --Rejedef (talk) 03:06, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Eastern Europe edit war

Please develop your proposed new section on the talk page (or in a sandbox if you prefer). We know that you understand that the views expressed in the article in The Economist are abnormal views - that was why you labelled the section "Controversy". The current version only gives that view - a controversy, by definition, must have several views.

Other users have labelled your proposed section:

"NNPOV and poorly referenced information"
"Cherry picking and opinionated addition. NNPOV. That West and East Europe are the same thing is not an appropriate statement for this and related articles"
"This IS cherrypicking and is also highly opinionated and controversial. Such statements NNPOV but presented as facts. In addition, there is no balance or other points of view mentioned. The sources given are not reliable."

You have reverted three times in 32 hours. To revert any more would be a clear case of edit warring.

--Toddy1 (talk) 12:18, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Further reference was added. --Rejedef (talk) 12:48, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly.--Toddy1 (talk) 14:52, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

There is a report on your edits on Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring--Toddy1 (talk) 14:53, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Western Europe edit war

Please stop edit warring on the article on Western Europe. You have made three reverts;

This is not a good idea. Develop a balanced section for an article, citing proper sources. Don't just edit war over it. If you behave reasonably, people who disagree with you will help to correct errors, etc. If you edit war, you will alienate other editors.--Toddy1 (talk) 12:27, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Further reference was added. --Rejedef (talk) 12:48, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

There is a report on your edits on Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring--Toddy1 (talk) 14:53, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

December 2011

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. While you did not cross 3RR, you are definitely edit warring, because several different editors have told you that you need to work on this carefully on the article's talk page, including getting all of your references in line first. Additionally, you inappropriately called another editor's removals vandalism, which they very clearly were not (see WP:VANDAL). It's time for you to stop trying to force your version into the articles and instead work to develop a consensus. Note that some of the editors do think that some portion of this belongs in the article, but that it needs to be done carefully and neutrally.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:05, 30 December 2011 (UTC)