User talk:Twomorerun

February 2012

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the article Brad Bird has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Thank you. freshacconci talktalk 11:40, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you were retiring... freshacconci talktalk 11:41, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Cass Gilbert, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.

Do not delete sourced information with a discussion and a consensus to do so. Beyond My Ken (talk) 12:37, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair warning

You can erase all the comment you want on your talk page but the history is still visible and you are on your third level warning for disruptive editing. You are heading towards a block for being disruptive, edit warring and pointy edits. Also, accusing other editors of vandalism when no such thing has taken place violates WP:CIVIL. freshacconci talktalk 11:48, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Numerous editors have now told you, via templated warnings, that your edits are disagreed with, and yet you have said nothing in response except via edit summary, and you have reverted all their edits without prior discussion. Edit summary remarks are not sufficient. Please respond here, on this page, to justify your removal of descriptive lanaguage, in some cases sourced and cited, from lede sentences, and explain why you have reverted their edits. Beyond My Ken (talk) 13:03, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I

This discussion on WP:AN/I concerns you. Please feel free to comment there. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:24, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you have not made any further edits since receiving the final warning above from Beyond My Ken. That's good as I would have agreed with a block and enacted one myself if you had made further edits without discussion. Wikipedia is a collaboration, and that means you can't simply work alone; you have to respond to people either on your own talk page, on theirs, or at articles. Not doing so is disruptive, especially if what you are doing causes people to raise objections. YOU may feel the objections are spurious but you still have to reply to them.

If you make further edits to articles without discussing them on an appropriate talk page when requested, I will block you temporarily. If you delete this message I will assume you have read and understood it, but a positive message from you here to that effect would be better. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 13:18, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]