User talk:DrDart

DrDart, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi DrDart! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cordless Larry (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

October 2018

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Brett Kavanaugh, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Qzd (talk) 22:20, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Brett Kavanaugh. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:29, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

--David Tornheim (talk) 02:43, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Brett Kavanaugh

I draw your attention to the editing restrictions at Brett Kavanaugh, which are displayed whenever you edit the page:

You must not make more than one revert per 24 hours to this article.
You must not reinstate any challenged (via reversion) edits without obtaining consensus on the talk page of this article.
You are required to abide by a civility restriction, and are subject to discretionary sanctions while editing this page.

You've broken You must not reinstate any challenged (via reversion) edits without obtaining consensus on the talk page of this article.

--David Tornheim (talk) 02:44, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for violating the WP:1RR revert restriction in place on the Brett Kavanaugh article. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:53, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]