User talk:Scuttlest
In which Jéské Couriano warns Scuttlest for things he didn't do[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. -Jéské (v^_^v X of Swords) 01:33, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -Jéské (v^_^v X of Swords) 02:56, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Edit warring warning[edit]
Your recent editing history 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. 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.
Please see my comment at WP:AN3. You have been edit warring on this article. You may still be able to avoid a block if you will agree to stop reverting the article and accept consensus. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 23:20, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
- Depictions of underage sexuality? In my wiki? It's more likely than you think. Scuttlest (talk) 04:49, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- I will try to put off closing the edit warring report until I hear your answer to my latest suggestion there. EdJohnston (talk) 16:16, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- Your changes of the headers on this page to mock the comments below them does not suggest good faith. EdJohnston (talk) 16:21, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- You're entirely too sensitive. Like I said over in the administration page, fine, I'll play your game, since it's the only method that will advance my position. Scuttlest (talk) 16:53, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- My request was to wait for consensus. Have you agreed to that? EdJohnston (talk) 17:39, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- Please refer to my reply on the noticeboard. Scuttlest (talk) 18:05, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- Not sufficient. I am planning to proceed with a block. It is hard to rely on your assurances when they are so vague, and when you seem determined to carry on the struggle. (Rather than proposing any better forum in which you will seek support). EdJohnston (talk) 18:38, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- I'm sorry I haven't been sufficiently clear to suit you, and yes, I do plan on carrying on the struggle within the bureaucracy, as opaque and frustrating as it is. I plan on waiting for further community involvement before pursuing further edits. I was planning to wait a week for further comment from different users and then submit an arbitration request. Scuttlest (talk) 19:31, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- The edit warring complaint has been closed with a warning to you. EdJohnston (talk) 20:39, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- I'm sorry I haven't been sufficiently clear to suit you, and yes, I do plan on carrying on the struggle within the bureaucracy, as opaque and frustrating as it is. I plan on waiting for further community involvement before pursuing further edits. I was planning to wait a week for further comment from different users and then submit an arbitration request. Scuttlest (talk) 19:31, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- Not sufficient. I am planning to proceed with a block. It is hard to rely on your assurances when they are so vague, and when you seem determined to carry on the struggle. (Rather than proposing any better forum in which you will seek support). EdJohnston (talk) 18:38, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- Please refer to my reply on the noticeboard. Scuttlest (talk) 18:05, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- My request was to wait for consensus. Have you agreed to that? EdJohnston (talk) 17:39, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- You're entirely too sensitive. Like I said over in the administration page, fine, I'll play your game, since it's the only method that will advance my position. Scuttlest (talk) 16:53, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- Your changes of the headers on this page to mock the comments below them does not suggest good faith. EdJohnston (talk) 16:21, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- I will try to put off closing the edit warring report until I hear your answer to my latest suggestion there. EdJohnston (talk) 16:16, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Swing Out Sisters cover.jpg[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Swing Out Sisters cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:08, 10 May 2012 (UTC)