User talk:2602:304:CDC0:D470:350D:DF14:1321:6BCB

December 2015

Hello, I'm Qzd. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to List of Cadbury products has been undone because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Qzd (talk) 03:25, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Ebay. Your edits have been or will be reverted or removed.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at ebay. Also, please stop accusing me of "vandalizing the facts" even though if you will just look at ebay's logo history, you will see that I am, in fact, correct. 174.23.172.2 (talk) 05:32, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

You might think that you are correct, but until you convince the consensus, your edits will continue to be reverted. 2602:304:CDC0:D470:350D:DF14:1321:6BCB (talk) 05:33, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

So you're blind, then? 174.23.172.2 (talk) 05:36, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

An Administrator has restricted editorial access to the page, so there is no point in you continuing to bother me. Can we please just go our separate ways? Thanks. 2602:304:CDC0:D470:350D:DF14:1321:6BCB (talk) 05:38, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

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

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. 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.
I have fully protected the article until this dispute is resolved and consensus developed on Talk:eBay. Note that this is not an endorsement of the current version. Note that edit warning and violations of the three revert rule may result it your account being blocked from editing. Prodego ^talk 05:38, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Alright, another administrator locked access to the page, so I moved on. 2602:304:CDC0:D470:350D:DF14:1321:6BCB (talk) 05:39, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Well actually, I protected the page. There is some discussion at Talk:EBay#Logo_style to build consensus on what to do. I've added my two cents there to kick of the discussion, your input would be much appreciated. Good old fashioned consensus building :)

Also – you are free to remove any warnings you want from above. They provide some useful links, but they can be repetitive and clutter up the page. You are also of course free to keep them as well. Prodego ^talk 05:45, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, but I'll most likely keep them as reference. I can just archive my talk page if worst comes to worst. 2602:304:CDC0:D470:350D:DF14:1321:6BCB (talk) 05:59, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Leave my talk page alone!

Hey, MORON! Yes, I AM being uncivil with you, but that's because you keep being uncivil with me! DON'T REPOST STUFF ON MY TALK PAGE THAT I WANT GONE! WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMOVE IT! 174.23.172.2 (talk) 20:29, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

No, if you cared to read the edit summary, would see I also reverted per WP:3RR, as well as WP:TPO. "The basic rule—with some specific exceptions outlined below—is that you should not edit or delete the comments of other editors without their permission.". So please, stop. 2602:304:CDC0:D470:350D:DF14:1321:6BCB (talk) 20:32, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

The rule is that you can remove it from your own talk page, stupid ass! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.23.172.2 (talk) 20:39, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Again, I'm not sure if I make this any clearer. "The basic rule—with some specific exceptions outlined below—is that you should not edit or delete the comments of other editors without their permission." Remember that this is the guideline for talk pages. Meaning you should not remove others comments, whether on your page or not, without permission. Unless you are seeing something that I missed. Please feel free to point it out to me, since I can't see to find your quote that says it's ok to remove others comments from your talk page without permission. 2602:304:CDC0:D470:350D:DF14:1321:6BCB (talk) 20:44, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

See WP:BLANKING. (I've amended this section's title under a different policy) -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 20:50, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

There it is. Thank you zzuzz, I couldn't find that for the life of me. I'm going to apologize to the IP user right now. Thanks again. 2602:304:CDC0:D470:350D:DF14:1321:6BCB (talk) 20:52, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your apology. Now you know that you can erase any and all of this stuff from your page if you want, also! 174.23.172.2 (talk) 20:56, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

---