User talk:204.152.219.51

K2 (drug)

In discussions, a number of editors decided that the K2 and Spice articles would be more manageable if combined under the title of Synthetic cannabis. If you disagree, please bring up your concerns on the talk page for Synthetic cannabis. Nuujinn (talk) 00:51, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not begin an edit war, reverting changes 3 times in a 24 hour period can result in a block, see WP:3RR. Nuujinn (talk) 00:53, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the one starting an "edit war." I'm doing the right thing! The Spice article has NOTHING, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with K2, do you not understand this? Again, with all due respect... Please, don't do disservice to Wikipedia.

Please take a look--it's not being redirect to the Spice article, it's being redirected to a general article about all synthetic cannabis. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:56, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and K2 and Spice are brands, and the substance they sell have similar properties and are generally used for similar purposes. WK is not a venue for promotion, and we reach decisions through discussion. Please bring up any concerns that you have on the appropriate talk pages, and engage in discussion. Nuujinn (talk) 01:00, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

204.152.219.51, you've just reverted a third time. If anyone reports you for this, it is likely you will be blocked for a time from editing. I ask that you undo your last revert--it seems to me that you are unfamiliar with WP policy and I am hoping you will engage in discussion. Nuujinn (talk) 01:03, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was just coming to issue a warning--technically speaking, this editor is okay at this exact moment, because 3 reverts is the maximum. However, I will both revert and report if you cross the WP:3RR bright line and revert again. Please--instead of edit warring, talk this out on the talk page. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:06, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

K2 is not just synthetic cannabis. They sell liquids, powders, etc. Different laws, different phenomenon, deserves it's own article. When I first read the article, it was very informative. Reading the general "synthetic cannabis" article gives little idea of the K2 phenomenon. I don't think that a few editor's decision should prohibit the millions of people, who need information specifically related to K2. How many newspaper articles do you see about "Spice"? Far not as many as those relating to K2. It's a different animal! Treat it as such and don't deprive people from information. Again, how many of the millions of readers of this article participated in the "vote" or "agreement" to vandalize this article? I'm seeing only 3 people made this decision for the rest of us. If it's between keeping an article and removing it, I'd say it should be kept. Better extra information, than no information.

Who is the one reverting to the NEW redirect and who's the one reverting to the Old article which has been on wikipedia for over a year? If anyone should be banned, it's you, I'm sorry.

WHY ARE YOU DEPRIVING PEOPLE FROM INFORMATION?? YOU'RE WORKING AGAINST WIKIPEDIA'S PRINCIPLES. THIS IS RIDICULOUS.

We aren't depriving people of information--the internet is wide open, and pretty much anyone can post whatever they want on a personal web site or blog. There are even sites that specialize in hosting information that has been deleted from wikipedia. All of the information posted on WP is release for public usage, you can take the old article and put it up wherever you has permission to do so. If you're not willing to engage in discussion in the appropriate venue, I doubt you'll convince other editors to your view, and here, consensus is a very important concept. I hope you understand. Nuujinn (talk) 01:13, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a short time for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule. 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. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

--Mkativerata (talk) 03:03, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.