User talk:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Joan Crawford[edit]

Hi. I hate edit warring, so I'm just going to talk to you here. Just because the site has the word "encyclopedia" in it, doesn't make it any less of a fansite. WP:LINKSTOAVOID, #11, says: "Links to blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority." This page on the site in question shows that it is by no means run by a "recognized authority". She is a fan, and it is not appropriate to link to fansites here. We are trying to be as professional as possible. Check any other actor/singer article and you will see that no such links are given. Please remove the link, otherwise I really will go to an admin (who I am confident will agree with me that the site is inappropriate). --Lobo (talk) 18:13, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Also, you need to use edit summaries to communicate with users, especially when you are undoing someone's edit because it just looks like you are intentionally causing trouble. --Lobo (talk) 18:21, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
You didn't respond to this or act upon it, so I have taken to removing the link myself (again). I can assure you that this will be the eventual outcome of the issue if we get other users involved, so there is no point in you continuing to add it. Leave it now. --Lobo (talk) 06:55, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Your behaviour is extremely frustrating. Three users have now said the site is inappropriate, but you continue to add it. At the very least, you should have brought a discussion to the talk page, rather than stubbornly reverting all edits. I have now requested protection for the page as you show no sign of stopping. --Lobo (talk) 19:07, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I refuse to bow to your thoroughly bullish (not to mention boorish) behaviour and will not be engaging in any further warring. I echo and fully support the comments of Lobo512 and I for one, will be making steps to report you and your constant and unjustified reverts on this article. It's a shame that you don't adopt the guidelines on WP:CIVIL and WP:TPG and work With us instead of breaching WP:OWN and WP:FANSITE. You may think it's big and clever to hide behind an ip address but, frankly, it's nothing short of cowardly and down right unconstructive. -- CassiantoTalk 19:19, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Joan Crawford yet again[edit]

Regarding the issue of the link that you have repeatedly tried to insert (despite opposite from various editors, myself included), I have begun a discussion on the matter on the Crawford article talk page located here. Discussing why you believe this link should be included in the article on the talk page is preferred instead of edit warring and communicating via edit summaries only. Thank you. Pinkadelica 20:30, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Warning - Edit Warring on Joan Crawford[edit]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. -- CassiantoTalk 21:09, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring. 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 text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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. T. Canens (talk) 17:58, 23 June 2012 (UTC)