User talk:Cyber-Policeman

Welcome!

Hello, Cyber-Policeman, 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:

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 ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 22:34, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

Dougweller (talk) 18:00, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014

Your recent editing history at Armenia shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. 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. Dougweller (talk) 13:06, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that in this case reasons don't matter as this isn't one of the few exceptions. Did you read WP:3RR? Dougweller (talk) 17:49, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message! I reverted you since apparently you are not aware of the WP:BRD policy. On wikipedia, if someone reverts your edit, you should go the talk page and explain your reasons. Keeping reverting takes nowhere. Instead, you should write on the article`s talk page what you wrote on my talk page, and try to reach a consensus. Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 17:54, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Helpful link

Hello. I see that you're new to editing on Wikipedia, and that someone else has welcomed you and provided some links. I hope you have taken the time to read some of the linked articles. I also noticed that you just ignored the note from User:Alessandro57 at Azerbaijan, provided in an edit summary, urging you to join the on-going discussion on the article's talk page, and put information back into the article. I would just like to point out WP:3RR. You might like to read that. If you continue edit-warring, you might get blocked from editing. CorinneSD (talk) 00:42, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Country map

Hallo, yes, I think that here you are missing a lot. There are very few rules here on Wikipedia, but one is WP:Consensus. This means that if there is an ongoing discussion on a subject, you must join it and discuss, irrespective of you thinking that you are right or wrong. If the others involved agree (or not answer), then you do it, otherwise you can always ask a third opinion. I advise also to read carefully what User:Dougweller wrote here above about the special status of Armenia and Azerbajan, and the consequences. Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 04:36, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014

To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and then appeal your block using the instructions there. Dougweller (talk) 05:24, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In March 2010, ArbCom adopted a procedure instructing administrators as follows: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped." Administrators who reverse this block without the clear authorisation described in that procedure will be summarily desysopped.