User talk:81.137.62.113

November 2018

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring.

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.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 11:40, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

edit warring block

As you weren't warned prior to the block beyond edit summaries, I've made it short. Please discuss your proposed changes on the article talk page. If you agree to discuss and not edit war, you can be unblocked.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 11:42, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

and just so you know--All content must be cited from reliable sources that are unconnected with the subject and have a reputation for fact checking. Please cite any change. Thanks, -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 11:44, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Pro Wrestling WikiProject!

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! I noticed that you edited a professional wrestling related article. Wikipedia has a professional wrestling WikiProject, which aims to improve all professional wrestling related articles. You are free to join or can explore what the project is about by clicking here. Here are some other good links to help you get started with Wikipedia:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! ImmortalWizard(chat) 19:08, 2 January 2019 (UTC) ImmortalWizard(chat) 19:08, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you ImmortalWizzard. --81.137.62.113 (talk) 19:09, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

January 2019

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to The Road Warriors, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Please read Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Style guide. Hope it helps. ImmortalWizard(chat) 19:11, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please consider creating an account and share your opinions on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling. ImmortalWizard(chat) 19:14, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Why is it "not constructive" particularly in light of the summary I provided? --81.137.62.113 (talk) 19:18, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Because reverting an only reverted edit without consensus is against our policy. It can lead to an edit war. Please place your opinions on the article's talk page regarding content. If you have a common problem wrestling articles, let users know on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling. Thanks. ImmortalWizard(chat) 19:25, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm sorry but there is a history here. First, the edit sat for many years untouched. Second, I did provide two sources for the listed point, but got blocked because they didn't meet RS guidelines. so when someone uses this premise to remove a point, that is called WP:GAME because one is treating a legitimate edit which lacks an airtight verification as though it were a total hoax which it is not. If I edited the Saturn article to say that unicorns, dragons and angels all live there, then even if this was backed by a source, instinct would surmise that the source were jocular. We are a million miles from that scenario and I can't see why doubting Thomases just can't tag the section instead of blank the whole effort. --81.137.62.113 (talk) 19:31, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

I would argue you are gaming the system. We are definitely not gaming since disruptive editing is clearly against our policy. If you think your content does not deserve to be removed, please reach for consensus on the talk page. We community clearly does not agree with your point of view. You may be permanently blocked from contributing if continue to edit this way. ImmortalWizard(chat) 19:56, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

No you miss the point. I'm gaming nothing because the point stood for years untouched yet read by surely countless. When someone provides a source that is unreliable, and someone uses this to remove a point rather than look for a reliable source himself, that is WP:GAME in no finer feather. The antagonist here has no proof that what he is removing is a hoax, or that it is misguided, he is simply using the rule-book to blank legit information. Consensus is for controversial matters, not whether or not we include something because editors 1 and 2 object to the source in question. Had there been reliable sources (which you are welcome to look for), the conglomeration would have needed better reasoning if wishing to remove the peice. --81.137.62.113 (talk) 20:02, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. ImmortalWizard(chat) 20:14, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

LOD

Please, stop. Your edition was reverted several times by diferent users. First, your claim is unsourced. I made a research and I found only two reliable sources [1] No one about the Legion of Doom. Also, it feels like trivia. Why it is important how the tag team was called under kayfabe by an announcer? Wikipedia is not a place for die-hard fans. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 21:57, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Right. Number 1. You and one or two of your acolytes have engaged in an edit war and have done so purely on the basis that there were no reliable sources. Today is the first time I am hearing that my point is trivia. Number 2, if not for die hard fans, then the articles have no one to write them and no one to read them. Take die hard fans out of the equation and you are left with blind leading the blind: something written by amateurs and aimed at ignoramuses. The "different users" as you put it clearly have no knowledge of the tag team or the era as nobody in his right mind could challenge a point mentioned in dozens of uploaded versions of Wrestling Challenge on YouTube. I could probably fish out countless points that are both "trivial" and "unsourced" on Road Warriors, and if my point gets eliminated, so do the rest. See what you're left with. --81.137.62.113 (talk) 22:09, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

January 2019

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

In addition to adding unreferenced content, you have been edit warring to keep unreferenced content in an article. This is not acceptable and you must abandon this behavior if you want to edit Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:29, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Cullen this is robustly unfair. The antagonists are those to remove the part when they could just as easily have tagged it. And they have edit-warred as you'll now see. The rationalisations are in the above thread. And it is also unfair because I was not interfering with the article in question after one of the edit-warriors removed it again. In the first place, the point I was making was true and not poorly referenced because hundreds of YouTube uploads of editions from the time prove my point. Then one of them switched tact and decided to call it "trivial" which was never mentioned before. Also, the point sat there for years before someone boldly removed it. So if there were issues with the sources I provided in the past, Wikipedia has various tags to draw attention to the matter (citation needed, better source required, etc) without having to be confrontational as the other bundle of editors have relentlessly been. --81.137.62.113 (talk) 06:09, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Sanctions notice

Please read this notification carefully: it contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions to curtail disruption in articles related to professional wrestling. Before continuing to make edits that involve professional wrestling, please read the full description of these sanctions here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

LM2000 (talk) 00:53, 6 January 2019 (UTC)