Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. 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. 216.21.150.4419:55, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fansites cannot be used as sources. Mass unreferenced content will be removed from Wikipedia because it's policy. Poorly written content amounts to nothing more than POV original research and will be removed even quicker than the uncited content. And, just so you know, adding anything "word for word" from any external source is copyvio and you could find yourself blocked for a much longer time than simply breaking policy 3RR. Which, you are up to 6 reverts now and are about to be reported to Wikipedia Administrators if you should violate this policy again. 216.21.150.4420:36, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but copy + pasting something directly from an external source is a copyright violation. Besides, like User:216.21.150.44 stated, the content broke the following policies; WP:NOR, WP:CITE and WP:SOURCE. Also, please keep this discussion off my talk page, if you're going to argue with another user, do it on your own or their talk page. Thanks. ĤĶ51→Łalk03:22, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Mastersman, I have blocked you for 24 hours for 3RR violation on Terry Kath. I am not expressing an opinion about the 'correctness' of your edits, simply that you reverted more than 3 times in 24 hours. Please take this time off to review our WP:3RR policy. I realize that there are multiple anon-IPs also editing this page, but none of the edits I have seen appears to be 'vandalism', as defined by our WP:VAN policy. Incorrectly labeling an edit that is made by someone, who in his/her own mind is improving the entry, as 'vandalism', escalates a content dispute and can be seen as uncivil. Please review these issues also, perhaps by reviewing our rules found in WP:5. In the meanwhile, as a temporary measure. I have soft-protected the entry, so anon-IPs and newly registered accounts would be prevented from editing it for the time being. Feel free to email me or any other admin if you have any comments or questions. Thank you for understanding. Crum37522:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure what is difficult to understand WP:OR is pretty clear - what you want to add to the article is original research. If you are unable to supply a source that meets WP:RS then do not re-add it to the article. Let me repeat, no source, no inclusion. --Fredrick day18:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You have been blocked for your disruptive, and repeat insertions of content against community consenus and violation of the WP:3RR. When the blocke expires I hope you will contribute constructivley and engage in discourse instead of edit warrning. This is in regards to the article on 25 or 6 to 4. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider)20:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism and are immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you.
