User talk:Sancap

Welcome!

Hello, Sancap, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 15:06, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Please note that I have reverted a number of your edits across multiple articles as they introduced unsourced personal info to biography articles. Note that this type of information requires the inclusion of reliable sources for verification. In addition, the full names and biographical data on family members are generally not included in articles unless they themselves are notable. You can read more about this at WP:BLPNAME. --Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 17:39, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sancap, about the Supercouple article, Wikipedia does not care what you think about any one couple. We must defer to the sources.[1] You can't remove reliably sourced content only because you disagree with what the source says. There must be a valid reason for removal, and you have not provided one. You need to read WP:Verifiability, and other Wiki rules apparently. 85.10.202.142 (talk) 17:06, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. You can take this up on the talk page, but continued removals are disruptive. Drmies (talk) 22:30, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

September 2012

Your recent editing history at Supercouple shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Drmies (talk) 01:48, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for breaching the 3 revert rule on Supercouple despite having been previously been warned about the 3 revert rule here. 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 adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Dpmuk (talk) 02:01, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 2012

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring, as you did at Supercouple. 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 adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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. Drmies (talk) 03:37, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DR/N filing

I have removed the Supercouple dispute again. You must use the proper formatting to request help in a dsipute on Wikipedia. Failure to do so will only result in the dispute deleted as it must be made in the proper manner and it is very easy to do. Use this automated form: Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/request.--Amadscientist (talk) 02:16, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]