User talk:Achstein2222y

May 2012

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Prometheus (film), did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place "{{helpme}}" on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Prometheus (film) was changed by Achstein2222y (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.886157 on 2012-05-29T03:13:47+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 03:14, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Prometheus (film) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
The content you added is not appropriate for this article. It's a lengthy diatribe about a completely unrelated film, and the text contains a lot of grammatical errors, original research, and unsourced claims. It would perhaps be appropriate to a separate article about Demme's film, but it isn't appropriate in the article about Scott's film, which is totally unrelated other than that it is a sci-fi film with the same title. Shoehorning such a large chunk of content about an unrelated film (it's not an "alternative film"; that suggests the 2 are substitutes for each other, which they're not) into this article is inappropriate. Further, calling other editors "Hitler" and "Stalin" when they revert your edit is wholly uncivil. --IllaZilla (talk) 05:10, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kevinklee for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. --IllaZilla (talk) 14:53, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]