User talk:71.139.29.193

June 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Evlekis (Евлекис) 23:50, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can we all go to the talk page and continue discussion from there, because we run the risk of all being blocked. Admins are only concerned about the 3RR and any violation is an offence to them. Evlekis (Евлекис) 23:58, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have discussed all along, Schrandit blindly reverts and discusses only when forced to. 71.139.29.193 (talk) 00:00, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone will have to do more, otherwise it will go in the hands of the admins, we cannot have these edit wars. Sorry about that. The discussion is open now on the talk page. Evlekis (Евлекис) 00:05, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Schrandit has edit-warred to removed reliably sourced content on many articles. He knows better. As in other cases I simply found more sources that also support the content. We should rely on good sources, not Schrandit's judgement. 71.139.29.193 (talk) 00:23, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - Schrandit (talk) 00:38, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war at Bob McDonnell. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:02, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

71.139.29.193 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I shouldn't have edit-warred but didn't know what else to do. Schrandit did the same exact thing on Equality Mississippi, he blindly reverted with no discussion even after being asked not to. He removed sources and then asked for those very same statements to be sourced. This went on and on until finally an admin stepped in and confirmed Schrandit was indeed mistaken. Schrandit even defended himself with a guide page about what to do if a link is dead (these weren't) and even that page said not to remove sources. He edit wars until caught, removes sources and content until caught and even sources stuff to the Vatican and then feigns insult when I note other Catholics on Wikipedia don't push their POV and delete content just because they don't like it. Everytime I question him he deflects and gives false statements like that I don't know how to add sources. Not true, I added sources to stop him deleting statements, easily verifiable and not outrageous stuff he just wanted to delete.So what should I do when he blindly reverts, won't genuinely discuss, lies about other editors and edit-wars as his first answer to everything? How many articles does he get to cut apart and fill with tags? What should I do with such editing?

Decline reason:

9 reverts in less than 24 hours is clear WP:EW. Editor has been provided with WP:DR for next time. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:55, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You made 9 reverts in a few hours. The absolute limit is 3 in a day. I blocked both you and Schrandit for 48 hours to put an end to it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:33, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hear you, but what could i do next time he starts blindly reversing, removing sources and won't honestly discuss edits? 71.139.29.193 (talk) 20:46, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Start by reading the material on dispute resolution, which contains valuable information about how you could have handled the situation. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:52, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I have to lunch now and it's long but I'll read it, thank you. 71.139.29.193 (talk) 20:54, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

December 2010

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Benjiboi for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. - Schrandit (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.