User talk:Coco977

Welcome!

Hello, Coco977, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! — Masum Ibn Musa ^Conversation 13:37, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to move pages to bad titles contrary to naming conventions or consensus, as you did at Republic of China general election, 2016, you may be blocked from editing. RGloucester — ☎ 17:53, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you move a page maliciously, as you did at Republic of China general election, 2016. RGloucester — ☎ 18:18, 30 July 2016 (UTC) Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Talk:Taiwanese general election ,2016 a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.[reply]

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. RGloucester — ☎ 18:23, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And this mess was caused by you deliberately making meaningless edit on the page of the other name which prevents others to move back--Coco977 (talk) 18:28, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The proper procedure for making a bold move is described at WP:BRD. You make a bold move, someone reverts you, then you discuss it on the talk page. You don't move to any number of crazy error-laden titles and cause a mess across the encylopaedia because you can't get it into to your head that you may be wrong. Please stop this nonsense. RGloucester — ☎ 18:30, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Formal warning

Do not do undiscussed moves you know to be contentious. Do not do cut and paste undiscussed splits of articles. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:27, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this, closing any RFCs or making any moves without waiting for RFCs to be closed will result in a lengthy block for you. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:48, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And yet another formal warning. More undiscussed edits like this will result in a block. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:36, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Making cut-and-paste moves after warning

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for Disruptive editing. 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 ~~~~}}.

See User talk:EdJohnston#Urgent request for previous background. You went ahead and did a cut-and-paste move of List of political parties in the Republic of China after being previously warned not to do that. Due to your recent opening of a move discussion at Talk:Republic of China general election, 2016#Requested move 30 July 2016 you should be well aware that the naming of Taiwan-related politicial articles is contentious. You were warned about a cut-and-paste move you did above, at User talk:Coco977#July 2016 but you did another one anyway. EdJohnston (talk) 21:52, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for copyright violations--Ymblanter (talk) 14:59, 28 August 2016 (UTC). 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 ~~~~}}.[reply]

You do not seem to get the point, hence the new block--Ymblanter (talk) 14:59, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ymblanter:This is the discussed solution on the talk page. See Talk:List_of_political_parties_in_the_Republic_of_China#Split,Talk:Elections_in_the_Republic_of_China#Requested_move_14_August_2016--Coco977 (talk) 16:07, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that this was copied without any attribution, which is a copyright violation. (The discussion so far only contains two users and IMO far from conclusion, but I would not block you just for splitting the article).--Ymblanter (talk) 16:10, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So how could I make an attribution on the copied page?--Coco977 (talk) 16:20, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:PROPERSPLIT --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:27, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see, can you unblock me so I can add Template:Copied to the talk page?--Coco977 (talk) 16:51, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will unblock you now, since you seem to understand why you have been blocked, but remember that if you once more move/split/transfer text without proper attribution it can bring you to a serious trouble.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:28, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And again...

Please stop making double redirects like this. Your fixation on Republic of China <=> Taiwan renaming continues to be disruptive. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:18, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think that was because my change to was List of political parties in Taiwan was reverted.--Coco977 (talk)

September 2016

Hello, I'm Lemongirl942. I noticed that you recently removed some content from One-China policy without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Lemongirl942 (talk) 04:25, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Chinese Taipei. 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. I'm not sure why you removed the WTO thing twice. [1], [2]. Your actions are borderline POV pushing. I suggest you to discuss rather than continue. Lemongirl942 (talk) 04:31, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Chinese Taipei. 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. Lemongirl942 (talk) 04:35, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making disruptive edits, as you did at List of political parties in Taiwan.

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 notice boards.
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, you may be blocked from editing. Bradv 04:35, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at List of Chinese flags. Lemongirl942 (talk) 04:39, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of Chinese flags. 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. Lemongirl942 (talk) 04:41, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at List of Chinese flags 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 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. Lemongirl942 (talk) 04:44, 8 December 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:Coco977 reported by User:Bradv (Result: ). Thank you. Bradv 04:45, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are you aware we have an article on Chinese Taipei Olympic flag? The text of that article explains the situation, which might appear puzzling at first. Your edit summary was "Listing a Taiwanese flag as Chinese flag violates neutral point of view". You've been blocked before for edit warring in this domain, so it would be sensible for you to respond at WP:AN3 and agree to wait for consensus. EdJohnston (talk) 05:25, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You've been warned for edit warring at List of Chinese flags, per this complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. Please read the advice in that report. Use the talk page before changing the article again. Continued reverts may cause any admin to block your account. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 15:53, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion invite

Hello. I invite you to join a centralized discussion about naming issues related to China and Taiwan. Szqecs (talk) 04:55, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Elections in Taiwan , but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 03:49, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Taiwan talk section.

@Coco977: You are correct in stating that opinion regarding factual information here of Wikipedia is a bit of a fine line, and regarding my previous Taiwan edit, I have opened up a new talk section to discuss the issue, as the law by what I can tell regarding the issue the law has not been changed on the matter of ROC national borders. I would welcome your inupt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Taiwan#Claims_over_the_mainland JadeEditor (talk) 01:58, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]