Revision as of 05:32, 6 July 2015 editDarkwind (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users42,095 edits You have been blocked from editing for violation of the three-revert rule on United Against Nuclear Iran and Anti-Iranian sentiment. (TW)← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:33, 6 July 2015 edit undoDarkwind (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users42,095 edits →July 2015: blockNext edit → | ||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
== July 2015 == | == July 2015 == | ||
<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''72 hours''' for ] and violating the ], as you did at ]. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may ] by first reading the ], then adding the following text below this notice: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx|" code. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here ~~~~''}}.<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 ]. —] (]) 05:33, 6 July 2015 (UTC)</p></div><!-- Template:uw-3block --> | |||
{{subst:uw-3block|page=United Against Nuclear Iran]] and [[Anti-Iranian sentiment|time=72 hours|sig=yes}} |
Revision as of 05:33, 6 July 2015
Irreligion in Iran
There are errors in spelling, punctuation and grammar with the reverted edits. Sources have been removed as well.--AnarchistFakest (talk) 03:51, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Please stop edit warring. The verified sources are continuously being removed.--AnarchistFakest (talk) 04:02, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- I don't think you seem to understand what I'm trying to tell you. I have reliable sources that you keep removing. In doing so, you add your own sources that are irrelevant to the article and then cite them with grammatical and spelling errors. Now who's the one pushing their agenda?--AnarchistFakest (talk) 04:19, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- Are you working for the Islamic Republic by any chance due to your persistent anti-irreligious edits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnarchistFakest (talk • contribs) 04:37, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
March 2015
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Irreligion in Iran. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. However, 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. Bbb23 (talk) 04:51, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring. Thank you.
Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring. Thank you. All Rows4 (talk) 21:28, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
July 2015
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at United Against Nuclear Iran. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice:{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.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. —Darkwind (talk) 05:33, 6 July 2015 (UTC)