User talk:Jamirowikee
Welcome!
[edit]
|
1RR
[edit]
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in being blocked from editing—especially, as the page in question is currently under restrictions from the Arbitration Committee, if you violate the one-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than one revert on a single page with active Arbitration Committee restrictions 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 one-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the one-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 19:40, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- Jamirowikee, if you don't revert yourself, you will be blocked from editing. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 21:09, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
On what grounds?
- Did you not read the warning Vaselineeeeeeee gave you? You can not make more than 1 revert on the Ben Shapiro page. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 21:18, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
The revert was simply in order to prevent the vandalism and the deletion of relevant information from the page in question, and as such was justified. The Wikipedia admin are free to do as they will.
Important Notice
[edit]
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 20:50, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
[edit]
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Jamirowikee reported by User:Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d (Result: ). Thank you. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 22:10, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
What's the point in dialogue when one can enter into bullying tactics? No need to employ one's wit in such situations. --Jamirowikee (talk) 22:43, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
April 2021
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:40, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
When adding links to material on external sites, as you did to Christopher Hitchens, please ensure that the external site is not violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube or Sci-Hub, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If you believe the linked site is not violating copyright with respect to the material, then you should do one of the following:
- If the linked site is the copyright holder, leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page;
- If a note on the linked site credibly claims permission to host the material, or a note on the copyright holder's site grants such permission, leave a note on the article Talk page with a link to where we can find that note;
- If you are the copyright holder or the external site administrator, adjust the linked site to indicate permission as above and leave a note on the article Talk page;
If the material is available on a different site that satisfies one of the above conditions, link to that site instead. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:44, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
Important additional notices
[edit]This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Together with the American Politics notice above (20:50, 6 April 2021), that's four notifications about editing highly controversial topics, all before having made 100 edits on Wikipedia. I'd say that's too early, and – as you have noticed in the discussion at WP:ANEW and with other users – you may currently lack the experience to edit these topics without causing noticeable disruption. Please seriously consider avoiding these areas for now.
Ideas for uncontroversial contributions can be found at the Task Center and the community portal.
You are not required to do so, but further disruption will lead to a topic ban from such areas sooner or later. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:59, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
New message from ToBeFree
[edit]
Message added 20:12, 9 April 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.