User talk:Cognito58

Erm, I'm not the one who vandalized the page... WhisperToMe (talk) 17:33, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This was my edit [1] - I *reverted* vandalism. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:36, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Hugh "Skip" McGee III. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Jarkeld (talk) 16:57, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to The Kinkaid School‎, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Postoak (talk) 02:01, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2009 Controversy at The Kinkaid School

You have tried three times over several years to remove this section, and others have disputed your removal (both in general, and with specific rebuttal to your concern). You'll need to get some WP:CONSENSUS to remove it--that's the first step in dispute resolution. It is not "obvious and non-controversial" that this content does not belong and it does not appear against policy to include it. DMacks (talk) 19:49, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

April 2012

This is your last warning. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at The Kinkaid School, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:22, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring, as you did at The Kinkaid School. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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. DMacks (talk) 13:56, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Cognito58 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

your reason here: a dispute about content should not lead to blocking. My position is that posting a huge amount of content, in the context of a school's 106 year history on a minor issue is not warranted. At present that content takes up most of the sources. This was a minor issue. No teacher was fired. The school is strong and admissions are high. This story does not deserve that much coverage and I should not be blocked as a user for having that opinion

Decline reason:

A few things to comment on:

Your currently not blocked, as your block has expired.
Par the edit warring and vandalism policy under which this falls, continuous reverting is grounds for a block, which was actioned when needed since multiple warnings regarding this did not seem to have an effect.
Wikipedia contains all information relevant to an article, as long as it is properly sourced, and does not rely on editor opinions. If you believe a section of the article is over covered, you are welcome to discuss this on the article's talk page. You may not, however, persistently revert other editors to remove it under above policies.

Seeing your edits on the article, i suspect that you are closely involved with the school in question. If this is the case, please read WP:COI as well. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 14:31, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 13:56, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]