User talk:217.39.132.9

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Warnings

[edit] Edit warring on Hereford and Shrewsbury

Please refrain from repeatedly undoing other people's edits, as you are doing in Shrewsbury. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. The three-revert rule (3RR) prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, please discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 16:27, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

A discussion has also been started at Talk:Hereford#Request for Consensus: Welsh Name (copied from Shrewsbury but same debate) in which you are encouraged to present your viewpoint. Thanks. — Satori Son 16:39, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

You have violated the three-revert rule on Hereford. Any administrator may now choose to block your account. In the future, please make an effort to discuss your changes further, instead of edit warring. Being correct is no excuse for breaking the rules. There is a debate re consensus. Please use that instead. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 17:00, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

The only reason I am not blocking this IP account now is so that you may continue to participate in the discussions on the article talk pages. But please be aware this is absolutely your final warning: do not revert any user's edit on those two articles again. (Also be aware that another administrator may still decide to block this IP at this time - my decision is not binding.) — Satori Son 17:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] February 2008

Please do not delete content from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Liverpool, without explaining the reason for the removal in the edit summary. Unexplained removal of content does not appear constructive, and your edit has been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox for test edits. An edit summary stating that content is 'irrelevant' is insufficient explanation: please visit the article talk page and explain the reasons why you think content should be removed ColdmachineTalk 09:59, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Anonymous

You contributions are all anonymous and appear to consist of sniping at others' work rather than any positive contribution of your own. have the courage to creatre an account and try a more participatory approach. --MJB (talk) 12:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kilpeck, and non-English names

In this edit you removed the Welsh name from Kilpeck, with the comment rm Welsh name. It's not in Wales.

In this edit, I restored it, with the comment Reverting. Right, it's not in Wales. But its [sic] in border country. Cf Bratislava.)

In this edit, you removed it again, with the comment English is the only official language in England, unless we are doing to add every permutation of the name in every language of the world,

First, this comment of yours makes no sense. If English is indeed "the only official language in England", this is in no way hinges on "[adding] every permutation of the name in every language of the world".

Secondly, nobody has suggested adding every permutation of the name in even one language of the world. For example, nobody has suggested saying English genitive form "Kilpeck's".

Third, nobody has suggested adding any name in a language other than English or Welsh. I've no idea where the "every language of the world" fantasy arrived from.

Fourth, you obviously either haven't read, or have chosen to ignore, what you'll see in (for example) Bratislava.

Fifth, it's not clear why your own uninterest in names in languages other than English would cause you to remove them. (Do they impede readability? Do they offend you somehow?)

You appear to be on some sort of crusade to remove information that does not appeal to your tastes. To me, this looks pretty much like vandalism. Drop it right now, or expect to be prevented from editing further. -- Hoary (talk) 14:16, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy due to persistent vandalism originating from your proxy server or network. If you have a registered Wikipedia username, you may log in and continue to edit. Otherwise, once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.