User talk:Correctingsection0062

January 2015

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at U2. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:41, 26 January 2015 (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) 06:48, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 2015

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at The Miracle (Of Joey Ramone). Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:16, 21 March 2015 (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:Correctingsection0062 reported by User:Walter Görlitz (Result: ). Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:31, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at The Miracle (Of Joey Ramone). 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 adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, 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. Bbb23 (talk) 04:49, 21 March 2015 (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. Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:35, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you agree to stop warring on these genres, there may still be time for you to avoid a longer block. The thread where you can respond is WP:AN3#User:Correctingsection0062 reported by User:Walter Görlitz (Result: ). Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 17:19, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Continued genre warring after expiry of previous block

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 4 days 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 adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, 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.

The full report is at WP:AN3#User:Correctingsection0062 reported by User:Walter Görlitz (Result: Blocked). The previous 3RR was here on March 21. Your edit summaries show a lot of confidence that you are right. "Deeply sorry for reverting it back, but prior to discussing in the talk page. The article should be kept in its original state." Not sincerely sorry, it appears. Otherwise you could wait for the others to agree with you first. EdJohnston (talk) 20:08, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's alright, even though I finshed finding a better and more reliable source for the album wikipedia and I was able to replied to the user who reported me. But anyways, I was just trying to discuss the issues with the other users. It seems like no one wants to discuss and the one who did discussed, mostly discussed about the reverting rule and not the topic itself. Hopefully next time they'll be willing to discuss. Thanks for the heads up and have a lovely day. Correctingsection0062 (talk) 20:08, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Adam Hughe's Catwoman.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Adam Hughe's Catwoman.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. NeoBatfreak (talk) 07:31, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]