User talk:Evanthius Donatus

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello, Evanthius Donatus, and welcome to Wikipedia!

An edit that you recently made seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox.

Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or type {{Help me}} on your talk page here, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:43, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Evanthius Donatus, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Evanthius Donatus! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! ChamithN (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Caroline Hoxby

Hi Evanthius, I've semi-protected the article, following a request on WP:RfPP, because there seem to be several new accounts causing a problem there. Removing the tag does not remove the protection. The tag is there only to explain to new editors why they can't edit the article. Sarah (SV) ^(talk) 19:54, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

April 2015

Your recent editing history at Caroline Hoxby 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 get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 19:55, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing and edit-warring. Normally this would be a timed block, however, as this appears to be your only purpose in editing Wikipedia, I have made the block of an indefinite length. Specifically, you are blocked until you are able to convince a reviewing administrator that you will cease reverting others and will discuss your changes on the article talk page. I have no idea why you continue to remove the protection template from the article, but you will need to stop doing that as well. 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 below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:52, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

I request to be unblocked. If you review my editing history, you will see that I made a series of constructive edits to a page. They simply consisted of adding information and citations. Many of these were undone summarily without any clear reason that I could see. I did then revert the text several times, which I now understand is contrary to the policy of edit warring. I will henceforth promise not to engage in edit warring and to use the talk page to discuss edits. I never consciously removed a protection template from an article; I wouldn't even know how to do that. Wikepedia has involved policies, and it is not necessarily easy for a newcomer to master them all immediately. I will add that although I began with this article, I do in fact have expertise on many subjects and was hoping to make constructive additions to other articles as well.

Accept reason:

Following your request, I've unblocked your account. PhilKnight (talk) 16:16, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ponyo:- would you object to an unblock? PhilKnight (talk) 18:24, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@PhilKnight: No objections from me.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:12, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Evanthius Donatus, as you may have seen it was found that you created an account in an attempt to evade your block. Please note that further instances of sockpuppetry will lead to blocking of those accounts and an extended block for your main account. Best regards, Mike V • Talk 21:22, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]