User talk:Quione

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello, Quione, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.  Again, welcome! Yobol (talk) 17:01, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

June 2011[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on article. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. The use of sarcasm on talk pages is inappropriate. Information.svgAdditionally, please sign your talk page posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. (You may also click on the signature button Insert-signature.png located above the edit window.) This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when.Novangelis (talk) 19:09, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

October 2011[edit]

In one short post on Talk:Aspartame controversy, you violated numerous policies:

I would suggest you read the above policies and Wikipedia:Sarcasm is really helpful. In addition, you failed to sign your post, again.Novangelis (talk) 23:16, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you use talk pages for inappropriate discussions, as you did at Talk:Aspartame controversy, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Novangelis (talk) 15:33, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

May 2012[edit]

Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on Talk:Aspartame controversy. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. Unless you have some evidence of a conspiracy, which I am quite sure you do not, STOP THIS NOW. Dbrodbeck (talk) 20:00, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


A discussion regarding your ongoing disruptive editing has been started.Novangelis (talk) 22:03, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
The discussion has gone to archive without a timely response on your part. Please do not respond in the archive or resume your disruptive talk page abuse/personal attacks.Novangelis (talk) 17:45, 1 June 2012 (UTC)


You are being offered another opportunity to engage in discussion about your disruptive editing.Novangelis (talk) 16:25, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
After having ignored another discussion of your inappropriate talk page edits, there should be no reason for you to resume your advocacy. Please do not edit article talk pages if you are not attempting to participate in constructive discussions about improving that article. Complaining about policies is not article improvement and should be restricted to policy talk pages. (This is not an invitation for you to disrupt policy talk pages with non-constructive complaints in order to make a point.)Novangelis (talk) 03:33, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

topic ban[edit]

{{admin help }}

If i am topic banned once is it very easy for wikipedia to expand this to a many years ban?

No. Topic bans are usually imposed as a result of a community discussion at one of the administrators' noticeboards, WP:AN or WP:ANI, and are almost always for a finite period of a year or less. Any extension would normally also be the result of a discussion where you could put your case. Even if an "indefinite" topic ban is imposed, that does not mean infinite, and it can be appealed after a time, and may be lifted or modified if satisfactory assurances are given. JohnCD (talk) 17:22, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I am know people that say they were banned. First for 3 months and then after the 3 months had expired banned for one year with no chance to defend themselves whatsoever. I would like to understand this, It seems to be excessive.

Quione (talk) 19:09, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

August 2012[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, as you did at Talk:Aspartame controversy, you may be blocked from editing. Please stop your disruptive editing, you have been asked MANY TIMES to stop this, just cut it out. Dbrodbeck (talk) 19:03, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

{{admin help}} How do I stop the above harrissment. Please tell me.

Hello Quione,Welcome to Wikipedia. What type of harrassment are you talking about ? I do not see anything above on your user talk page that would constitute as Wikipedia:Harassment. Unless i may have actually missed anything, other users have been talking to you in a civil manner as far as i can see. Can you please elaborate on what specific problems or issues you are having on Wikipedia. Thank you. TheGeneralUser (talk) 21:11, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

The big things are trying to ban me and removing my posts. Quione (talk) 14:13, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

By removing my posts I mean posts to talk pages. Quione (talk) 14:29, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Talk page policies have been explained to you many times. At this point, it does not matter if you choose to ignore policy or cannot understand policy. You can address the issues here: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#SPA trying to push limits.Novangelis (talk) 14:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Something else to keep in mind is that the NPOV policy does not mean cover all possible views of a subject. It means to cover the subject as it's presented in reliable sources with relative weight given to the various views. See WP:WEIGHT. Views that have been dismissed by reliable sources, regardless of how many home-grown websites support those views, are given minimal coverage at best. If you're a supporter of a view that has relatively small support that may seem unfair, but Wikipedia is not here to promote fringe views, conspiracy theories, etc. This is especially true with science articles where significant weight is given to scientific studies over articles from non-scientists. Ravensfire (talk) 15:21, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

October 2012[edit]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did to Talk:Aspartame controversy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.Novangelis (talk) 17:23, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Quione. You have new messages at Novangelis's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

November 2012[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, as you did at Talk:Aspartame controversy, you may be blocked from editing. Dbrodbeck (talk) 17:24, 2 November 2012 (UTC)