User talk:KeepRecoome

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at User talk:Xlaer. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:37, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry bout that, didn't even know I couldn't do it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KeepRecoome (talk • contribs)

It's fine. Just don't do it without permission again. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:40, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All good then, but you don't have to act like an admin you know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KeepRecoome (talk • contribs)

It's just protocol. Don't forget to sign your posts with four tildes like so ~~~~. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:47, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Xlaer for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 17:34, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Links to Recoome

Do NOT use an IP to edit war and try to get around 3RR. Stop attempting to add an incorrect link to articles that NEVER had them before. Its blatantly obvious you are only adding the links now in a misguided attempt to claim its linked, when it wasn't. The links aren't relevant. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 17:36, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter if it never USED to be there, has Frieza ALWAYS been there? No, he has not. Because when a page is made, you can add it to the list. Oh and no, I'm not trying to get around the 3RR, I was logged out and didn't know I was not signed in. User:KeepRecoome

In this case, yes, it does. The article is already clearly going to be deleted or redirected, not merged. The character was so minor no one even thought about putting a link in before. There is no valid reason to go around linking an article that will not exist anymore at all. It will just be removed again anyway. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 17:46, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How many more must tell you stop your attempts at linking to an article that is being redirected/deleted before you stop? Linking to an article you KNOW will not exist soon is irresponsible and a waste of everyone's time. Switching accounts does not erase your already shady history here, and I strongly urge you to reconsider how you want to edit here. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 19:26, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

November 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Template:Dragon Ball. 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 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. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing'. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. 3RR counts when you use an IP to do edits first -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 17:37, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The funny thing is, is that you also did this. User:KeepRecoome]

No, two editors have reverted you here. You are the only 3RR violator. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 17:46, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User notice: temporary 3RR block

Regarding reversions[1] made on November 27 2008 to Template:Dragon Ball

You have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

The duration of the block is 12 hours. William M. Connolley (talk) 21:15, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some advice: don't edit war. You don't need to keep the sockpuppet templates, but if you are using alternate accounts its a good idea to make it obvious William M. Connolley (talk) 21:24, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Daynavawdrey.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Daynavawdrey.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Polly (Parrot) 21:07, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]