User talk:Mthinkcpp/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Mthinkcpp. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
IP repeatedly doing revoked edits
 | This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
IP 84.127.80.114 on the Debian page is repeatedly doing edits that have been revoked 3+ times. 84.127.80.114 also accuses those (several users) who revoke the edits of vandalism. Could the IP be blocked from editing the Debian page? mthinkcpp (talk) 09:49, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Also see Talk:Debian. mthinkcpp (talk)
- I have given the editor a talk page warning about edit warring, and about using Wikipedia for campaigning. Only under very exceptional circumstances is it appropriate to block a user who has not first received clear explanation as to what is wrong with their editing, and given a chance to take that on board and adjust their editing accordingly. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:02, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
- Thank-you mthinkcpp (talk) 09:48, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- The editor is planning (Talk:Debian, latest post) to reinstate the edits one by one, presumably in the view that this does not violate the warning. Can this be avoided? mthinkcpp (talk) 15:10, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
- Alternatively could the Debian page be semi-protected temporarily. mthinkcpp (talk) 09:16, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
- Please see User talk:GorillaWarfare#Arbitration case request assistance. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:21, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Debian". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 21:39, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
- Will you be participating or should we start without you? --Guy Macon (talk) 13:44, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
- I presume you wrote the above before you saw my statement on the matter. mthinkcpp (talk) 16:35, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
- Yes. I did. Sorry about that. --Guy Macon (talk) 18:41, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
- I presume you wrote the above before you saw my statement on the matter. mthinkcpp (talk) 16:35, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Arbitration case request: Debian
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Debian and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks,
This request may still be in the filing party's talk page. 84.127.80.114 (talk) 19:43, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Case request declined
The arbitration request involving you (Debian) has been declined by the Arbitration Committee
The comments made by arbitrators may be helpful in proceeding further. For the Arbitration Committee,--S Philbrick(Talk) 23:26, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
April 2014
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Unified Modeling Language. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.
If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:01, 7 April 2014 (UTC)