User talk:Jacques Darrow Carr

May 2016

Hello, I'm RA0808. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Everest College seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. RA0808 ^talk _contribs 18:23, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Everest College are inappropriate. Please see WP:NPOV and WP:CITE. Note that we cannot accept your eyewitness account; we require a reliable source that meets the criteria outlined by WP:RS. --Yamla (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are in danger of violating WP:3RR for your edit warring on Everest College. I will remind you once again that eyewitness accounts are not accepted as sources at Wikipedia. Please, please take the time to read the policies and guidelines we've linked to you, so you can avoid being blocked. --Yamla (talk) 19:57, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Everest College shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

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. Theroadislong (talk) 21:59, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Everest College, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. GAB^Hello! 21:59, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Everest College. Theroadislong (talk) 10:56, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Yamla (talk) 11:36, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Everest College. 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 first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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. Bishonen | talk 19:27, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect this brand new user may not be aware of the repeated warnings above. IMO, he should be unblocked once he finds this page and indicates he's ready to stop edit warring. Bishonen | talk 19:29, 3 May 2016 (UTC).[reply]