User talk:MrEggWasher

Don't write on my user page

Being uncivil

Hi MrEggWasher, your edits to Thomas.W's talk page weren't very civil - being able to discuss content issues without resorting to name calling (or "commenting on the editor") is an important part of working on Wikipedia. Please consider removing your uncivil remarks -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 19:02, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

,redacted>

Well I tried - I'm removing your comments on his talk page, and I recommend you remove your personal attack above. Carry on and I'll block you, rather simple really -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 19:05, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Carry on what? Disputing a correct edit? MrEggWasher (talk) 19:07, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disputing a correct edit is fine, being uncivil whilst doing it is not -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 19:08, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User talk:MrEggWasher. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. This is now into personal attack territory. Don't make comments like that on someone's talk page, and don't make them on your talk page either. Meters (talk) 19:09, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If it's correct why would you delete my all my comments? In only one of them, I called him an idiot. Durr durr.. MrEggWasher (talk) 19:10, 10 August 2017 (UTC) MrEggWasher (talk) 19:10, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To give you a chance to write a civil message explaining whatever it is you're going on about -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 19:11, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Restore my messages where I explained. You got that? Ok? Want me to repeat again? MrEggWasher (talk) 19:12, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Go do it yourself -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 19:14, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey listen. Get off me already. Alright. You understand? MrEggWasher (talk) 19:15, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be keeping an eye on your edits - any more personal attacks and I'll block you. Alright. You understand?

-- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 19:16, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did you get me? This talk is over. Don't reply to me anymore. Ok? You got that?MrEggWasher (talk) 19:18, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MrEggWasher, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi MrEggWasher! 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 AmaryllisGardener (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

20:04, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

August 2017

Hello, I'm Tdts5. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Wikipedia:Wikibreak have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.Tdts5 (talk) 23:55, 10 August 2017 (UTC) K[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of Himalayan peaks and passes. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. K2 does not have infinite isolation, the name does nto mean "Killer Mountain", and according to its article it is not even in the Himalayas. Meters (talk) 04:30, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't ask for your opinion. MrEggWasher (talk) 05:21, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DS-alert

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PakePakwan, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Quinton Feldberg (talk) 15:21, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a suspected sock puppet of PakePakwan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · SPI · cuwiki) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this is a sock puppet account, and your original account is blocked, please also note that banned or blocked users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia; and all edits made under this account may be reverted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. GAB^gab 15:57, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]