User talk:146.74.1.99

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Regarding your edit to Image:Magnolia leaf.jpg:

Your recent edit to Image:Magnolia leaf.jpg (diff) was reverted by automated bot. The edit was identified as adding either vandalism, link spam, or test edits to the page. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. If this revert was in error, please contact the bot operator. Thanks! // VoABot II 19:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Atlanta Braves

Please do not add unhelpful and non-constructive information to Wikipedia, as you did to Atlanta Braves. If you continue to do so, it may be considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. - BillCJ 23:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Atlanta Braves, you will be blocked. - BillCJ 20:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our neutral point of view policy will not be tolerated.-- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 20:53, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalise Wikipedia, as you did to Atlanta Braves, you will be blocked.

[edit] Blocked

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our neutral point of view policy will not be tolerated.-- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 23:13, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unblock request

While a factual content dispute is definitely not vandalism, you should have used edit summaries to explain your position and/or contributed to the discussion about this issue on the article talk page.

The position that the Braves have won '11 consecutive' titles is not unreasonable given that there was a one year gap... however, the position that they have won '14 consecutive' titles is ALSO not unreasonable given that NOBODY won the title in that 'gap' year. Either can be described as technically true depending on whether you assume those are 'consecutive YEARS' or 'consecutive titles actually awarded'.

The proper course would have been to discuss it and try to come up with wording that everyone could agree to.

You also should look into Wikipedia's policies on neutral point of view. Several of your edits have included clearly negative or dismissive comments about the teams you are commenting on. These things may be your opinions. They may even be 'true' as you said in your e-mail to the unblock list... but they are not NEUTRAL and that's not how encyclopedia content is written. Wikipedia includes information that is neutral and verifiable... not the 'Truth' as perceived by one group of editors or another.

I'll unblock as you've been blocked for several days now and these things, rather than incorrect accusations of vandalism, should have been explained to you prior to the block. However, I must advise you that continuing as you were, repeating POV edits with no attempt at discussion or compromise, will inevitably just get you blocked again. The idea that world series champions who got there through a 'wild card' slot finish in "second place" is far from universally accepted, and thus insisting on use of such wording as 'Truth' is clearly disruptive. Wikipedia doesn't exist for settling scores or saying who is best. It's a collection of information which can be verified as accepted in reliable sources. --CBD 23:54, 9 February 2007 (UTC)