User talk:A50000

Welcome

Hello, A50000, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement.

Pondle

Happy editing! Pondle (talk) 10:44, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Department directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard - a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

Your history? and Chomsky edits

Given that you are a new editor jumping right into editing, are you a former anonymous IP? Given that we've had such a problem with User:Karmaisking creating sock puppets to edit the article, any discussion on the talk page that would reassure people about you would be helpful. Feel free to find out what that source says about Chomsky and quote it in the article to settle the issue of whether the source calls him a "left" libertarian. Or find another that does. I think there are some that call him a libertarian socialist as well. CarolMooreDC (talk) 16:47, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion in History of Cuba

Here, I've reverted your restoration of some removed material. Please see WP:BURDEN. If you again restore this material, please cite appropriate supporting sources. I note that the removed material did include a general reference to The Cambridge History of Latin America. I note here that that work has a number editions and consists of multiple volumes. If you re-cite that work, please specify the particular edition, volume, and page number(s) supporting the reinserted material. Thanks. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:43, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources

Please remember that Wikipedia is a tertiary source, and all of our material needs to be clearly cited to a reliable source. Your recent edit to Authoritarian personality replaced uncited and inadequately referenced material without adding any sourcing or discussing on the talk page to provide justification for your edit. Please do not do that. Thanks, - 2/0 (cont.) 18:21, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose, at their own discretion, sanctions on any editor working on pages broadly related to Eastern Europe if the editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. These pages have been defined by the Arbitration Committee to include Mass killings under Communist regimes. If you continue with your behavior on Mass killings under Communist regimes, reverting without engaging in discussion on the article's talk page, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article ban. The committee's full decision can be read at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Digwuren#Final decision. Thank you, --Mkativerata (talk) 04:52, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, 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.

You have been blocked for edit-warring on Mass killings under Communist regimes by continuing to revert the addition of a tag on the page without engaging in genuine discussion on the article's talk page first. (Note the block log reads a breach of WP:1RR which is not strictly correct - there were two reverts within about 26 hours, which is gaming). --Mkativerata (talk) 23:05, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

January 2013

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Socialism. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. RolandR (talk) 21:35, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring, as you did at Socialism. 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 below this notice 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. Orange Mike | Talk 22:26, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:RolandR

Please stop restoring your message at User talk:RolandR. Policy gives editors a large amount of discretion to remove talk page comments from their own user talk pages, when and editor does so, it is interpreted to mean they have read the message, if RolandR does not want to respond, no one is going to make them. Your continued attempts to add the message actually constitute edit warring, but as no one has explained the above, I'm just going to warn you that if you keep adding the message, you will likely end up blocked again.

As to the substance of the message, you did edit war in January, with a combination of RolandR, and a variety of other editors. From January 20 to January 31 you made 9 edits that were quickly reverted. When you push up to the limit of the WP:3rr rule more then once on the same article you are most likely edit warring. Technically yes, you can't edit war alone, but where one editor is edit warring with many, it is the one who usually ends up being blocked. Once your reverted the first time, leave it alone till you can develop consensus to make the change, if you are having trouble, follow the Dispute Resolution process. Monty ₈₄₅ 19:55, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, while editors are not obligated to respond to you, admins are expected to respond to queries about their use of the admin tools, so if you really want to discuss the legitimacy of your Block, you are likely to have better luck raising it with the blocking admin, Orange Mike, rather then RolandR, who only issued the warning. Again though, the block looks legit to me. Monty ₈₄₅ 19:59, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Editors are not obliged to respond to queries, no matter how important you may feel that they are. To continue to post on a user's talk page in the face of the user's expressed preference that you do not can be seen as harassment. I suggest that you drop it, or you run the risk of being blocked again.--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 22:18, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Socialist/Communist

Please bring up your issues with terminology on the article's talk page instead of edit warring over pedantry.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 01:47, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As an editor of this collaborative project, you must adhere not just to the policies but to the requests and consensus established by other editors. Just because you think you are correct does not mean you are allowed to do act on that. If you contact me again over this pedantry and your holier than thou attitude I will report you for harassment.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 09:16, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:A50000 at Soviet Union. Thank you. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 04:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is A50000. Thank you. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 21:17, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked after harassing both RolandR and Ryulong and persistent edit-warring

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used mainly for trolling, disruption or harassment. 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. Atama頭 19:45, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]