Jump to content

User talk:Dweeby123

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 220.101.28.25 (talk) at 13:07, 1 October 2010 (Tony Curtis Revert: Rationale please!). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

September 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Talk:Ruth Langsford has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Anna Lincoln 08:58, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Last of the Summer Wine. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Redfarmer (talk) 17:26, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects that aren't broken

Hi, just thought I should let you know about WP:NOTBROKEN as you seem to be "fixing" a lot of redirects that aren't broken. AnemoneProjectors 09:59, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And that includes changing [[Businesswoman]] to [[Businessperson|Businesswoman]]. AnemoneProjectors 12:23, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

September 2010

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at James May. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.118.178.137 (talk) 15:01, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to User talk:203.206.69.216 has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you. You have given this anon user a level 4 warning for their first edit, and it is extremely arguable that it was vandalism at all - as for several other edits you have reverted with Twinkle as "vandalism". If you have some sort of problem with the original photos and captions on the James May and Jeremy Clarkson articles, and feel that your own favourites are preferable, then I suggest you take it to the article talk page and gain a consensus - it is you that is wanting to change it from the original picture, therefore the onus is on you. Halsteadk (talk) 17:05, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Here is what vandalism is not, from WP:VANDALISM: "Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not vandalism."

You have plenty of templates on your talk page from other editors questioning your own edits. I suggest you familiarise yourself with the WP:FIVEPILLARS. I also suggest you find a better way of dealing with edits you don't like than to call them vandalism. Radiopathy •talk• 16:46, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Andy Gibb. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Radiopathy •talk• 16:51, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism redux

Regarding this, I strongly recommend that you stop calling edits that you disagree with 'vandalism'. If I see this again, you're going to WP:ANI, with the possibility of being blocked for your disruptive behaviour. Radiopathy •talk• 17:33, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did to Russell Grant, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.   — Jeff G.  ツ 03:29, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

?

I beg your pardon? --RobertGtalk 13:43, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Curtis Revert

Hello Dweeby123,
Could you please explain your big revert here?. An edit summary of 'revert' doesn't give any real reason behind your action. Some of the 'red' links probably needed to be returned, but you also removed some good links and some referenced text here?. Regards, 220.101 talk\Contribs 13:07, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]