Another Family Member Account is ScoBrit
Please note WP:BRD. If you make an edit and it is reverted then raise the topic on the TALK page of the article - do not comment in article main space. If you need any help let me know --Snowded TALK 20:45, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
I moved your comment to the end of the talk page and gave it a title. Please read the guides to editing above, it will save you a lot of time and effort and make life easier for the rest of us! --Snowded TALK 20:57, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Scotland, UK and the act of Union
Thanks for all these edits which I am sure were well-intentioned. As you can perhaps imagine, these matters have been the subject of debate already. Consensus has always been to be sensitive particularly to self-identification and to sources rather than having a blanket policy such as you seem to be trying to enact. I will therefore be reverting all these edits and beg you not to make any more. If you wish to change how this is done in the future, it may be possible to discuss that. Let me know if you want to take this path and I will tell you what to do next. Let me know also in general if there is any help you need in editing here. --John (talk) 23:08, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hello John, I see no problem in changing "River City" origin to "United Kingdom" or any British Citizens Nationality to "British". Do you mind telling me how this is unacceptable?
- Weather you like it or not if I see a mistake on Wikipedia that needs changing I will of-course edit it until it meets my and the most factual requirements, Wikipedia is about Fact and "Fact" alone is what I have to work on. When I look at pages who have "Nationality" as "Scottish" when clearly they are a British citizen of the United Kingdom (If Alive up to 1707 or born After) I will change it because like I said I work on "Fact" (Not some Pre-1707 Fantasy).
- When I see a TV programme Aired by the British Broadcasting Corporation and funded by Tax Payers money from all over the United Kingdom that TV programme has originated in the United Kingdom.Tamarin2010 (talk) 23:59, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for your message. You may need to appreciate that we work on consensus here, and that individual editors' opinions such as yours, while valued, will not suffice to change how we do things. My offer above still stands and I look forward to helping you understand how to be a better editor. This essay might help you as well. --John (talk) 00:19, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- You may find this useful in terms of who owns the channel 3 licences: licensing.ofcom.org.uk/tv-broadcast-licences/current-licensees/channel-3/ 1701Will (talk) 18:19, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. The you made to John Swinney has been reverted, as it introduced negative or controversial biographical material without providing a reliable source for this information. Wikipedia requires that all such material be sourced to address the issue of libel. Thank you. Falcon8765 (TALK) 23:10, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 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. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 23:56, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Can I ask if you also edit as User:ScoBrit? If so, and I'm assuming good faith as a new, or relatively new, user but it may be worth clarifying this as using two accounts is likely to be controversial. There can be legitimate reasons for doing this but this and this may be of interest. Mutt Lunker (talk) 09:16, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
In that case as ScoBrit is your brother and uses the same computer, per Sharing an IP address you both "should disclose the connection" particularly as your interests are very similar and you "(edit) in the same areas, particularly on controversial topics". Mutt Lunker (talk) 13:20, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yep - you and your brother should state the linkage on your main page - otherwise you are going to end up with a sock report --Snowded TALK 14:02, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- Nice to see you editing again but you'd better address this issue sharpish if you are to continue or you may find yourself in hot water. As advised, you and your brother should declare your connection on your user pages. Mutt Lunker (talk) 19:24, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- An admirably quick response but your user page rather than (or as well as) your talk page please. Best ask your brother to do likewise too. Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:03, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.
You are edit warring on River City and Taggart, replacing Scotland with United Kingdom when that change has been contested. Do not edit the main articles without agreement on the talk page. --Snowded TALK 12:44, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Scottish people. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 19:47, 19 August 2010 (UTC) L Kensington (talk • contribs) 19:47, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm really not sure what you thought you were doing here, but - no. "Scottish people" covers the diaspora outside Scotland, e.g. in Canada, New Zealand, etc. This has been covered in the talkpage discussion you appear to be participating in, so I'm not sure why you're unclear about this. Regardless, this edit was so far from being acceptable. All-caps comments would be inappropriate on the talkpage - on an article they're inexcusable. Don't do it again. TFOWR 19:51, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- No worries, I thought there had to be an explanation for it. I've struck my comment, above. TFOWR 19:54, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- Even on a discussion page your message was inappropriate, both in tone and in content. Wikipedia is not a soapbox for your political views, and I am ready to block you if necessary to enforce this. We give a lot of leeway to new contributors, but at some point you have to do something useful and accept the rules that govern our community, most of all WP:CONSENSUS. Please bear this in mind when making any future edits. Thanks. --John (talk) 20:09, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ScoBrit for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Mutt Lunker (talk) 15:54, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
This is the only warning you will receive regarding your disruptive comments.
The next time you make a personal attack as you did at User talk:Mutt Lunker, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Favonian (talk) 13:16, 31 August 2010 (UTC)