User talk:Riteinit

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions have removed content without a good reason to do so. Content on Wikipedia should not be removed just because you disagree with it or because you think it's wrong, unless the claim is not verifiable. Instead, you should consider expanding the article with noteworthy and verifiable information of your own, citing reliable sources when you do so. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Editing tutorial
Picture tutorial
How to write a great article
Naming conventions
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Roger 8 Roger (talk) 12:36, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hear what you're saying bro, but Wikipedia itself calls historic counties 'former counties' meaning they don't exist. What I deleted was inaccurate and misleading. Riteinit (talk) 12:39, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello there. I am just reaching out, because I too have had many spats with Roger 8 Roger over quite a long period of time about the same topic and have recently bickered with them (and others) over on the Bexleyheath page. I feel like we are allies in this cause (historic counties having no place in Outer London articles, especially in the lead) so if you have time I could really use your assistance over there, and in return I can support you in Romford. Best wishes! Justgravy (talk) 14:09, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I'll tryta assist if I can. How can I help? I imagine they're tryna say Bexleyheath is in the historic county of Kent... It seems that those that push the historic counties angle are those that have given up tryna convince people that these places ain't in London at all (coz the fact they are is undeniable, tho they tried to deny it in the past). Now they're tryna say they're in both. Riteinit (talk) 14:19, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's exactly as you say with these kinds of editors yes, grasping at straws springs to mind. I see you have already posted in the talk page section I created, this is a good start and I thank you for this. I can never officially advocate edit warring, but I will say that editors like Roger 8 Roger very much have a "one rule for me and one rule for everyone else" mentality when it comes to reverting edits and they will try to report and ban editors for this behaviour whilst engaging in it themselves. This is something which I will not stand for and do not think anyone else should stand for either. I also mentioned that here as a defence for you and for what we are trying to achieve here. Justgravy (talk) 16:01, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blinking ay mate, they didn't waste any time coming after us did they? They're even laughably suggesting that we're the same person. How have these historic counties bullies managed to get such a strangle hold on Wikipedia? They'll destroy what's left of the site's reputation the way they're going, it's already a byword for unreliable data... Riteinit (talk) 16:50, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Riteinit, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Riteinit! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Gestrid (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I may take you up on your kind offer. Riteinit (talk) 16:03, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. Your history indicates a pattern of disruptive edits. Stop it. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 02:25, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're a bully. Gonna report you. Riteinit (talk) 02:26, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Romford shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Lord Belbury (talk) 16:32, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mate, get on the cases of those changing my edits. I've done the talk route, yet they keep vandalising pages. I'll tryta stick to the revert rules but why would I allow unsubstantiated nonsense about a place to remain there? Believe it or not, there are still a few people who come to Wikipedia to get information on stuff. The efforts of these 'historic counties bullies' are undermining what's left of Wikipedia's reputation. Riteinit (talk) 16:45, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Middlesex

Pay attention to your editing. [https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Middlesex&diff=next&oldid=1006479904 This changed a working link (List of places in Middlesex) to one that goes nowhere (List of places in the former county of Middlesex). You may want to rethink the way you are going about things and discuss the edits you want to make. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 06:24, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. Riteinit (talk) 06:27, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mgkfact, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community. Lord Belbury (talk) 10:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What a palava... Riteinit (talk) 10:50, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

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:Riteinit reported by User:Lord Belbury (Result: ). Thank you. Lord Belbury (talk) 08:47, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sort out the other person. They're the one changing stuff without valid reason. Riteinit (talk) 08:49, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making personal attacks towards other editors, such as at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mgkfact and at Talk:Romford. To be clear, you cannot call editors cretins or flunkies.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Lourdes 09:16, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Admittedly I didn't read the rules (does anyone, I mean fully?). Didn't mean to hurt anyone's feelings or break the rules, but something sinister is going on with this historic counties stuff... Riteinit (talk) 09:44, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]