User talk:Falcon2112

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 22:52, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Falcon2112, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Amalthea 13:10, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Zeitgeist: the Movie

Hello Falcon, and welcome to Wikipedia.
It was brought to my attention that there is an editing dispute on the Zeitgeist: the Movie article in which you are involved. Can you please discuss your changes with Jordgette and other editors on the article's talk page? This article is, as I understand it, controversial, and lots of discussion has gone into some aspects of the article, the lead section for example.

One of the key editing principles on Wikipedia is called "bold, revert, discuss": If a bold change is made to an article and reverted by another user, the next step is to discuss that change on the article's talk page. If you think your changes are an improvement, you need to convince the other editors of the article that you are correct – that is the only way for your changes to remain in the article anyway.
What you shouldn't do is edit war over it, and just repeat your disputed edits without a consensus. Edit warring can quite swiftly lead to short blocks or protection of the article.

If you have any questions about this, feel free to ask.
Amalthea 13:10, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

June 2010

Please refrain from adding controversial content that has already been discussed on the article's talk page, as you did at The Zeitgeist Movement, without first establishing consensus on the talk page. Your edits appear to have gone against established consensus and have been reverted. Thank you. A p3rson ‽ 02:49, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did here: The Zeitgeist Movement. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Drmies (talk) 19:17, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at The Zeitgeist Movement. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Please stop your disruptive and non-neutral edits to the article. Drmies (talk) 19:19, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the final warning that you will receive regarding your disruptive edits, such as this edit you made to The Zeitgeist Movement. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing without further notice. Yoenit (talk) 19:19, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I applaud your enthusiasm for the topic, but you cannot hope to edit Wikipedia in this fashion and not be reproached for it. The Manual of Style has very specific things to say about, for instance, what ought to be in the lead, and your edits are at odds with those rules. Shouting at other editors in all-caps is another sure-fire way to arouse ire and suspicion. Please refrain from editing the article at least for a while: cooler heads typically prevail. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 19:21, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule. 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, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:26, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Falcon2112, you are being put on notice for edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule. You must understand that Wikipedia operates on consensus, and you cannot just repeatedly force edits into Wikipedia because you personally feel strongly about them. I notice that you have edited only two articles on a similar topic; may I suggest that you might have more success as a Wikipedia editor if you branched out into topics that perhaps you aren't as emotionally invested in. -Jordgette (talk) 23:33, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war. 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. - 2/0 (cont.) 04:21, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You immediately returned to edit warring following your block last week, and have continued aggressively reverting in related articles. Please when this expires take more care to explain your reasoning at the relevant talkpage, and develop a consensus among involved editors. - 2/0 (cont.) 04:21, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford University Research Project on The Zeitgeist Movement

Dear Falcon2112,

My name is James Beard and I am currently conducting research on The Zeitgeist Movement for my masters dissertation on the course Nature, Society & Environmental Policy at Oxford University.

I am particularly interested in how The Zeitgeist Movement represents itself and is represented by others on the internet, and how these representations match up to or run counter to its real world activities. My main interest is in the role of the internet and environmentalism/sustainability discourses in generating the globalist mindset of the movement's members.

As the leading editor of The Zeitgeist Movement page, I was wondering if you might be willing to talk to me a bit about why you feel it is important that The Zeitgeist Movement page contains the information that it does.

If you are willing to talk to me, please send me an email at james.beard [at] ouce.ox.ac.uk

Kind regards,

James Beard

J Beard 88 (talk) 08:44, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]