User talk:Wickey-nl

/Archive 1
/Archive 2
/Archive 3
/Archive 4
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
Wikipedia:Footnotes
Wikipedia:Template messages/Section
Template:Which?
Template:Requested move
Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources that are usually not reliable
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement
Noticeboards
POICA
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AndresHerutJaim
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive139#Plot_Spoiler
Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Brewcrewer/list_of_Palestinian_ax_attacks

---

WARNING

I do not discuss articles here.

--Wickey-nl (talk) 16:04, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

1rr at Jerusalem

assuming good faith that you forgot about the 1rr restriction I'll you know that you should self revert. thanks.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 16:58, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

...and at Beit El.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 17:39, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

You have more than 50,000 edits? You may study the rules first. --Wickey-nl (talk) 09:37, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

semi-protected

I semi-protected this page and your user page. Feel free to ask if you want the protection removed. Zero^talk 13:22, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

For interest

Hi, regarding "Superfluous tags within one citation", for interest, there are a couple of reasons why I often tend to cite every sentence in ARBPIA. For me, it helps to keep track of exactly where things have come from while the section is being developed, especially when there are multiple sources at play and the content is in a state of flux. Also, when an article is likely to be targeted by sockpuppets, editors who have clearly decided that they do not need to follow the rules, the content tends shredded over time as they tamper with it, sometimes to the extent that it is no longer possible to tell where anything comes from. Sean.hoyland - talk 08:42, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

I understand. In this case, the text was fairly coherent and unlikely to be splitted, but no problem. Cheers, --Wickey-nl (talk) 08:48, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Complaint about edit warring at Civilian casualty ratio

Please see WP:AN3#User:Yarron reported by User:Sean.hoyland (Result: ). This report claims a 1RR violation by User:Yarron. While reading the history I notice that you also have reverted twice in 24 hours. It is possible that whoever closes the report might sanction you as well. You might add your own comment at the 3RR noticeboard. It has not escaped my notice that more than one person might be adding non-neutral prose, but even prose that needs removing can get a person in trouble with WP:1RR. There is an ARBPIA banner on the article's talk page. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:27, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

You made no response to the problem with your own edits at Civilian casualty ratio. Another editor has now filed about your role on that article at WP:AN3#User:Wickey-nl reported by User:JungerMan Chips Ahoy!. You seem to have violated 1RR on 16 June. If you will promise not to edit Civilian casualty ratio or its talk page for two weeks you might escape sanction. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 18:07, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Wickey-nl, you may as well do that. JungerMan Chips Ahoy! is clearly a sock and they have started editing the Civilian casualty ratio article, so there is really no point wasting your time on that article anymore. I have taken it off my watchlist. Sean.hoyland - talk 18:54, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

ARBPIA 1RR at Civilian casualty ratio

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for WP:1RR violation at Civilian casualty ratio. 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 adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Per this complaint at AN3 of a 1RR violation (permanent link). EdJohnston (talk) 01:30, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

{{unblock|reason=False allegation. Apparently, the hasbara campain on WP has become more active again. The fact that I, who never violated the rule before and never been blocked before, was blocked overnight, even depriving him from the possibility to defend himself on the noticeboard, shows the alarming condition of Wikipedia.--Wickey-nl (talk) 09:14, 18 June 2014 (UTC)