User talk:Clausgroi

Revolver (album)

Please just stop changing this and cite a source for it, or at least use an edit summary. If you don't, I will block you for disruptive editing. Your move. --Rodhullandemu 23:49, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

ok, I'll put an edit summary (Clausgroi (talk) 00:05, 30 October 2008 (UTC))

Yes, but it needs to explain not just WHAT you're doing, but WHY. We need reliable sources here, not just edit summaries. Musical genres need to be as reliably sourced as anything else. If it isn't reliable sourced in the article, it can't go into the infobox, and it's as simple as that. --Rodhullandemu 00:10, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

but WHERE can I find SOURCES ?! I just KNOW that revolver is a psychedelic rock album, because it is obvious, commom sense, I don't have a source that proofs that ! a book can be a source ?? (Clausgroi (talk) 00:14, 30 October 2008 (UTC))

Unfortunately, what you and I both know, and what is common sense, doesn't work here. The test is verifiability, not WP:truth. Sources such as Allmusic, Rolling Stone and some others, are acceptable for rock musicians, albums, and tracks. Sorry if I appear to be difficult, but there have been endless edit-wars about minor details such as this, and it's unproductive. Nothing personal. --Rodhullandemu 00:27, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I understand. thanks for the explanation, I'll try to find some sources (Clausgroi (talk) 19:42, 30 October 2008 (UTC))

August 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to George Santayana may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• George Santayana, 'On My Friendly Critics', in Soliloquies in England and Later Soliloquies, 1922 (from Rawson's Dictionary of American Quotations via credoreference.com (accessed August 1, 2008).</

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:48, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Street Genius, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page British. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Laúd, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Steve Howe. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:10, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

IndianBio

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of best-selling music artists. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been undone.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 18:25, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Harout72

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at List of best-selling music artists, you may be blocked from editing. --Harout72 (talk) 17:30, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at List of best-selling music artists. --Harout72 (talk) 03:57, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at List of best-selling music artists, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --Harout72 (talk) 15:54, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

John

Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Reporting edit warring users is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia, resolution and removal of editors causing editing disputes to disrupt the community. However, it appears that the editor you reported may either not have engaged in edit warring nor violated the three-revert rule, the user was not sufficiently or appropriately warned, or your report was malformed. If the user continues to cause harm to other Wikipedia editors after a recent warning, please report it again. Thank you. Per WP:3RRNO, one's own user space is exempt from 3RR. You on the other hand have reverted multiple times at another user's page and on the article. Please do not do this again. --John (talk) 20:04, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

@John: "You on the other hand have reverted multiple times at another user's page and on the article" - Actually, just 3. And I still don't understand what you meant by "you need to be more careful with reverting yourself". Clausgroi (talk) 20:25, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

I mean that three reverts at another user's talk page is unacceptable. Please do not do this again. If the user blanks a message, we assume he has read it. Your reverts at List of best-selling music artists could also be problematic if you continue. Three reverts are not an entitlement and you can be blocked for edit-warring even if you have not made four reverts in 24 hours. --John (talk) 20:47, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

@John: I understood what you meant when the sentence was inverted: "you youserlf need to be more careful with reverting". OK about that.

About the List of best-selling music artists, I should only worry if my edits were disruptive, polemical, vandalism etc. Since they are valid additions to the article, however, I don't see how that could be a problem for now. Harout72, on the other hand, has been acting like the article's owner and has been removing valid content for unjust causes. He fails to understand that my addition conforms to the rules and seems to think, judging from what he said, that his opinions and inferences are more reliable as the sources, which obviously they aren't. Also, he has reverted me multiple times, so if justice is to be done, he should be punished as well (and let's not forget he was the one who started it). Clausgroi (talk) 21:48, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

AN/I

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Harout72 (talk) 16:05, 7 August 2016 (UTC)