User talk:Knotslanding

Archives

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule at Walt Disney World Monorail System. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. — Aitias // discussion 04:54, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Knotslanding (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

None of the changes were in violation of the 3RR rule. this is all harassment from Either Way. All the "reverts" listed by them are ALL different edits to different parts of the article. It was not a edit war on the same content.

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=None of the changes were in violation of the 3RR rule. this is all harassment from Either Way. All the "reverts" listed by them are ALL different edits to different parts of the article. It was not a edit war on the same content. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=None of the changes were in violation of the 3RR rule. this is all harassment from Either Way. All the "reverts" listed by them are ALL different edits to different parts of the article. It was not a edit war on the same content. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=None of the changes were in violation of the 3RR rule. this is all harassment from Either Way. All the "reverts" listed by them are ALL different edits to different parts of the article. It was not a edit war on the same content. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Read what I posted here. What you believe is incorrect. The reverts can be on different content within the same article. It does not have to be the same edit each time, either way (talk) 05:00, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again by your view anyone to make more then 3 changes to an article will be blocked. Give me a break. that is the point of Wikipedia, to fix and edit articles. NONE of the edits made were a edit war of the same content which is what the 3RR rule is about. It don't matter when the 24 hrs is up I will go back and change the "narration" back to Spiel which is what it is called by Disney. as for the other uses of "narration" I will change them too as they are incorrect as well. and i will be filing yet another report on your harassing me. Knotslanding (talk) 05:03, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please join and discuss it on the talk page of the article before just reverting it. As for "harassing" you, I'm not sure how I've been harassing you. I gave you a warning, you disputed the warning, quite adamantly (to the point of borderline incivility), so I tried explaining to you several times what you were doing wrong. You then reverted my edits, so I reported you, that's not harassment. You also inappropriately archived active discussions. I wasn't harassing, I was fixing things that you just happened to be involved with, either way (talk) 05:08, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You came into an article that you were never a part of and stuck you nose where it don't belong. You twisted the 3RR rule to make my edits look like a violation when I did the same as everyone else. Again (since apparently you cant read) NONE OF THE CHANGES I MADE WERE IN VIOLATION OF THE 3RR RULE. THEY WERE ALL DIFFERENT EDIT TO DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE ARTICLE. LIKE EVERYONE ELSE HAS DONE. For the last time DO NOT TALK TO ME AGAIN!!!! I do not care what you have to say anymore. I have requested an unblock. Don't care if it goes through or not. in 24 hrs I will come back and fix your changes. Knotslanding (talk) 05:12, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OH NO!

That was 3 edits to my talk page OMG. Better alert the 3RR police. Knotslanding (talk) 05:15, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

either way

You cannot request I be blocked for something I have not even done. According to you the 3RR is if a change is made in a 24 hr time frame/ if I am blocked for 24 hrs then any change i make after that time is new and does not fall under the 3RR. STOP HARASSING ME!!! Knotslanding (talk) 05:20, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're threatening to be disruptive after your block expires. Threats of disruption often lead to block extensions. The point of a block is not to punish, but, instead to prevent. So if you're threatening to disrupt, a block can be extended to prevent it from occurring, either way (talk) 05:23, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um I am not threatening to be disruptive. I am saying that I will fix the miss information you have posted. Knotslanding (talk) 05:25, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]