User talk:Shootseven

Welcome!

Hello, Shootseven, 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:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 01:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oliver Lee talk

Thank you.[1] Walter Siegmund (talk) 05:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Billy the Kid. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 04:53, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Billy the Kid 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 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. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 04:59, 30 January 2016 (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:Shootseven reported by User:Winkelvi (Result: ). Thank you. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 05:06, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) 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 necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 05:14, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Billy the Kid, you may be blocked from editing. None of your edits are sourced and are not in line with sources attached to the content. You need to stop editing the article disruptively NOW. If you do not, your account will end up blocked. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 05:34, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What is incorrect in my edits? I gave you the sources (if you'd look, the TW article is already footnoted there) and I gave you links to the spurious Tom O'Folliard photo.

The sad thing is, wikipedia let someone post this photo - with the only "source" being the claim on their own website that's it's him, and that's proof enough for you? This is why people don't trust wikipedia.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Billy the Kid. Last warning. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 21:42, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The sources were there: http://www.truewestmagazine.com/the-croquet-kid/

Winkelvi, should I take this user to AN/I? They are still at it on BTK. Just reverted them. Ches (talk) 21:49, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do, Chesnaught555. I have added the reverts/disruptive edits to the edit warring report - unfortunately, no one seems interested in doing anything about it at this point. Maybe if someone else (such as yourself) files a report, it will be attended to. Something needs to happen as this user seems uninterested in listening and heeding advice. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 21:52, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Winkelvi, will do, then! Thank you for your advice. Ches (talk) 21:53, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Billy the Kid, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Your behaviour on BTK is appalling. Seriously. Ches (talk) 21:50, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Ches (talk) 22:05, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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. Floquenbeam (talk) 22:39, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're new, so I would normally have cut you some slack and not blocked. But you continued to do it after being notified of our rules against edit warring, and in particular, after the report was filed at WP:ANEW. Please take the 2 days to read our policy on edit warring, and when you come back, avoid this problem in the future. I've seen a lot of people start their careers on WP by edit warring, and (by trying to be nice by not blocking) we've accidentally encouraged them to think it's OK. It isn't. Wikipedia will be improved alot if you learn from this, and value the talk page over the revert button when you return. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:43, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, to be clear, once the block expires, it would be a big mistake to revert back to your preference until a clear consensus is developed on the talk page. Patience and discussion are key. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:49, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Floquenbeam. I have no intention of appealing; I'm not a frequent editor, simply tried to correct a mistake, and went too far when I felt I was being bulldozed. For that I apologize. Hopefully someone else picks up the issues on the talk page so the problems can be corrected. Thank you. Shootseven (talk) 22:52, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your block had expired, but sometimes there's an autoblock glitch. I cleared the autoblock, and it sounds like you're all set now. Hopefully you (and Winkelvi, when he's unblocked) can approach this discussion in a more productive way this time. Floquenbeam (talk) 22:58, 1 February 2016 (UTC)}}[reply]

Dave Rudabaugh

Hi. Regarding your removal of the image I added to Dave Rudabaugh, if you are certain that it is not his image, could you please remove its association to Rudabaugh on wikidata as well? Otherwise someone else will probably add it back in later. Aithus (talk) 16:15, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. And yes, I'm sure it's not him. There are no known photos of Rudabaugh, though there are two disputed photos allegedly of his head after it was removed from his body. Shootseven (talk) 16:27, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]