User talk:Barcelona.women: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 13:43, 17 November 2009

warning/Discretionary sanctions

Hi, You've been active on the UN Watch page recently. Unfortunately I cannot agree that your edits have been done in good faith, for example in this recent [revert] you claim to have explained your actions on Talk, however you have not. You have also not responded to questions raised concerning the verifiability of the text you insist on repeatedly re-introducing. Please read through the discretionary sanctions linked [here]. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, where content is generated co-operatively with other editors. That requires honesty and a willingness to work with others. Please consider this a warning pursuant to the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles Kind regards, --Dailycare (talk) 17:00, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UN Watch

Your recent editing history at UN Watch shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Try to list out each of the individual changes you are seeking on the talk page and gain a consensus for your changes there first.

--71.156.89.167 (talk) 13:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 Hi, You've been active on the UN Watch page recently. Unfortunately I cannot agree that your edits have been done in good faith, for example in this recent [[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=UN_Watch&action=historysubmit&diff=325308387&oldid=325303371 revert]] you claim to have explained your actions on Talk, however you have not. You have also not responded to questions raised concerning the verifiability of the text you insist on repeatedly re-introducing. Please read through the discretionary sanctions linked [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Palestine-Israel_articles#Discretionary_sanctions here]]. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, where content is generated co-operatively with other editors. That requires honesty and a willingness to work with others. Please consider this a warning pursuant to the [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles]] Kind regards, --[[User:Dailycare|Dailycare]] ([[User talk:Dailycare|talk]]) 17:00, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
+==[[UN Watch]]==
+{{3rr|UN Watch}}
+Try to list out each of the individual changes you are seeking on the [[Talk:UN Watch|talk page]] and gain a [[Wikipedia:consensus|consensus]] for your changes there first.
+--[[Special:Contributions/71.156.89.167|71.156.89.167]] ([[User talk:71.156.89.167|talk]]) 13:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)