User talk:Izumidebito

Classification of Japanese

Hello. I appreciate your enthusiasm for the Altaic hypothesis, but to support the changes you made to the Japanese language articles you'll need to provide reliable sources. Thanks. Tweisbach (talk) 11:14, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Japanese language. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Canterbury Tail talk 00:25, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

September 2009

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did to Japanese language, you will be blocked from editing. Oda Mari (talk) 04:13, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to Japanese language. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. Oda Mari (talk) 09:55, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to Japanese language. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. Oda Mari (talk) 10:13, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies concerning neutral point of view and biographies of living persons will not be tolerated.Canterbury Tail talk 14:42, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Altic languages

As mentioned above repeated reversion is not useful, and can lead to blocking. However I noticed there was an attempt to provide a reference. This is really one for the talk page, not revert wars. Rich Farmbrough, 14:43, 30 September 2009 (UTC).

3RR

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing at Japanese language. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.Canterbury Tail talk 14:32, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

October 2009

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Japanese language. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. The ref. you provided is not good enough and does not support your edit. Please use the talk page and explain your edit. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 08:39, 15 October 2009 (UTC) Oda Mari (talk) 08:39, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Japanese language. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Oda Mari (talk) 10:06, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a short time for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule at Japanese language. 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. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Canterbury Tail talk 11:46, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Attacks

Further to the block you received above for edit warring, making comments like in this edit are against Wikipedia policy and will result in further blocks if you continue making such personal attacks. You obviously have something you want to add to the article, but multiple editors disagree with you. I suggest you take your suggestions to the talk page for the article if you feel it's something that needs to be included. Continued edit warring may result in further and longer blocks for yourself if you continue this line of editing. Canterbury Tail talk 11:49, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Izumidebito (talk) 02:51, 16 October 2009 (UTC)izumidebitoIzumidebito (talk) 02:51, 16 October 2009 (UTC)Please show exactly where I have made a personal attack? All I am doing is putting the truth out there. I have cited a source. Your blocking of me is very unfair and hurts the credibility of wikipedia.

Editing articles to include text like "hey mother fuckers stop thet or your gona gett a nice sex setion" is not acceptable on Wikipedia and will result in further blocks if you continue to insert such edits.

Now there is obvious contention of your edits from many users, yet you continue to push the same edits into the article against consensus. This is considered disruptive editing and edit warring. If you think the material has merit, then discuss it on the appropriate articles talk page. However if you continue to push your edits against consensus then you will be blocked from editing again. Please read and post on Talk:Japanese language before trying to add the text again that has been removed from the article on no less than 23 occasions now. If you continue against consensus you run the risk of being blocked from the project indefinitely. Please discuss your edits. Canterbury Tail talk 12:15, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Izumidebito (talk) 13:51, 16 October 2009 (UTC)You Canterbury will now be reported to Wikipedia.

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusive behavior and repeated ignoring of WP:3RR and WP:SPAM. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below; but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:00, 16 October 2009 (UTC)