User talk:Bello5Packo: Difference between revisions

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

Revision as of 19:54, 9 August 2016 editGB fan (talk \| contribs)Oversighters, Administrators103,343 edits You have been blocked from editing to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war on UNESCO. (TW)← Previous edit		Revision as of 18:38, 11 August 2016 edit undoGB fan (talk \| contribs)Oversighters, Administrators103,343 edits →August 2016: commentNext edit →
Line 7:		Line 7:

	<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''24 hours''' for ], 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 to the bottom of your talk page: <!-- 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 ].  -- ] ] 19:54, 9 August 2016 (UTC)</p></div><!-- Template:uw-ewblock -->		<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''24 hours''' for ], 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 to the bottom of your talk page: <!-- 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 ].  -- ] ] 19:54, 9 August 2016 (UTC)</p></div><!-- Template:uw-ewblock -->

			:I saw your response at ]. There are two things you need to know. First, you should not change someone else's comments (I changed the link back). If you believe the link is wrong, discuss it with the editor or include in your response that the link is wrong and provide the correct link. Next, just because people viewed the article during the time that section was in place does not mean they agreed with it. You should discuss why the content belongs in the article. How it pertains to UNSESCO and how the sources support the content and applicability to UNESCO. Just claiming that thousands of people agree with the content because it was viewed is not enough. -- ] ] 18:38, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:38, 11 August 2016

August 2016

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on UNESCO. 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 that Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
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. clpo13_(talk) 19:30, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at UNESCO. 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 to the bottom of your talk page: {{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. -- GB fan 19:54, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

I saw your response at Talk:UNESCO#Ataturk section. There are two things you need to know. First, you should not change someone else's comments (I changed the link back). If you believe the link is wrong, discuss it with the editor or include in your response that the link is wrong and provide the correct link. Next, just because people viewed the article during the time that section was in place does not mean they agreed with it. You should discuss why the content belongs in the article. How it pertains to UNSESCO and how the sources support the content and applicability to UNESCO. Just claiming that thousands of people agree with the content because it was viewed is not enough. -- GB fan 18:38, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:54, 9 August 2016 editGB fan (talk \| contribs)Oversighters, Administrators103,343 edits You have been blocked from editing to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war on UNESCO. (TW)← Previous edit		Revision as of 18:38, 11 August 2016 edit undoGB fan (talk \| contribs)Oversighters, Administrators103,343 edits →August 2016: commentNext edit →
Line 7:		Line 7:

	<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''24 hours''' for ], 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 to the bottom of your talk page: <!-- 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 ].  -- ] ] 19:54, 9 August 2016 (UTC)</p></div><!-- Template:uw-ewblock -->		<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''24 hours''' for ], 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 to the bottom of your talk page: <!-- 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 ].  -- ] ] 19:54, 9 August 2016 (UTC)</p></div><!-- Template:uw-ewblock -->

			:I saw your response at ]. There are two things you need to know. First, you should not change someone else's comments (I changed the link back). If you believe the link is wrong, discuss it with the editor or include in your response that the link is wrong and provide the correct link. Next, just because people viewed the article during the time that section was in place does not mean they agreed with it. You should discuss why the content belongs in the article. How it pertains to UNSESCO and how the sources support the content and applicability to UNESCO. Just claiming that thousands of people agree with the content because it was viewed is not enough. -- ] ] 18:38, 11 August 2016 (UTC)