User talk:Foleo: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 05:20, 25 July 2016

Welcome!

Hello, Foleo, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Mishae (talk) 00:06, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

April 2014

I reverted your edit to Operation Wrath of God for playing with the quotes, removing quotations and adding scare quotes like you did to Barack Obama religion conspiracy theories. Please keep in mind minor edits can have a major affect on article tone. Thank you, Origamite^{Please talk here} 21:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

March 2015

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Discrimination against atheists, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 05:06, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regensburg lecture

Please avoid using wp:weasel wording. Not that I disagree with you. Jim1138 (talk) 08:42, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some advice

You might want to brush up on your editing skills and etiquette. Unfounded accusations of "bullying" and "intimidation" are not well received on Wikipedia. Also, posting a 3rr warning on the talk page of an editor that has made 1 revert, makes you look like a fool(ie. someone that can not count), along with the fact you failed to notify the IP of their 3 reverts on that very same page.

If you or the IP want to change something and are reverted, I would suggest using the talk page. And if I see your IP "buddy" post another ignorant racist accusation on another editor's talk page, I will be MORE than happy to notify an Admin of the IP's problem. --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:24, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that 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. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Sro23 (talk) 01:58, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:19, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Let me make this clear. The two editors you are naming are not vandals. Do not report them as such. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:23, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring, as you did at Roman–Persian Wars. 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. NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:35, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Extended from the usual 24 hours for abuse of templates and general battleground attitude. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:37, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are a troll and you will not get away with your confrontational attitude. That is just what I was about to do: talk about the problem.

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, as you did at User talk:Foleo, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. _Muffled ^Pocketed 05:20, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 02:39, 25 July 2016 edit Foleo (talk \| contribs) 425 edits →‎July 2016 ← Previous edit		Revision as of 05:20, 25 July 2016 edit undo Serial Number 54129 (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 96,845 edits Only warning: Personal attack directed at a specific editor on User talk:Foleo. (TW) Next edit →
Line 46:		Line 46:

	You are a troll and you will not get away with your [[confrontational]] attitude. That is just what I was about to do: talk about the problem.		You are a troll and you will not get away with your [[confrontational]] attitude. That is just what I was about to do: talk about the problem.

			[[File:Stop hand nuvola.svg\|30px\|alt=Stop icon]] This is your '''only warning'''; if you make [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks\|personal attacks]] on others again, as you did at [[:User talk:Foleo]], you may be '''[[Wikipedia:Blocking policy\|blocked from editing]] without further notice'''. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people.<!-- Template:uw-npa4im --> [[User:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi\|<sub>'''<font color="green">Muffled<font color="green"></font></font>'''</sub>]] <sup>'''''[[User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi\|<font color="red">Pocketed</font>]]'''''</sup> 05:20, 25 July 2016 (UTC)