Jump to content

User talk:Antoine kornprobst

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mikel Sarwono (talk | contribs) at 17:28, 10 July 2016 (→‎July 2016). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Reply

Thank you for your message on my talk page. It was not just the inclusion of the linked in links that was inappropriate. The wikipedia guidelines say that only students who are themselves notable enough for a wikipedia article should be included in the infobox - see Template:Infobox academic - so I have again removed the names as none of them meet this criteria. Please do not add them again. Melcous (talk) 15:09, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

Information icon Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Raphael Douady. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 15:18, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making disruptive edits, as you did at Raphael Douady.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Melcous (talk) 15:26, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I refer you again to Template:infobox academic which clearly says "doctoral_students Only those notable enough for WP articles. Should be explained in the main text of the article; Those that are not mentioned in the main text may be deleted." Please also read WP:3RR - reverting content more than 3 times within 24 hours I can lead to an immediate block from editing wikipedia. You have already broken this by reverting four times. If you do it again, I will report you. Melcous (talk) 15:31, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Information icon Hello, Antoine kornprobst. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Raphael Douady, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

  • avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
  • instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
  • when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
  • avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
  • exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 15:18, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Raphael Douady. 331dot (talk) 15:30, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Antoine_kornprobst reported by User:331dot (Result: ). Thank you. 331dot (talk) 15:36, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Raphael Douady. 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.  Bbb23 (talk) 17:21, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh don't worry, I will never ever come back on this site if that's how you treat me... too bad for you !Antoine kornprobst (talk) 17:22, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Block Update [Important]

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 days for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Raphael Douady. 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.  Mikel Sarwono (talk) 17:26, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]