User talk:Mystic Technocrat
Welcome
[edit]Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.
Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...
Finding your way around:
|
Need help?
|
|
How you can help:
|
|
Additional tips...
|
This message is for you
[edit]I suggested that someone get in contact with you and they misunderstood.
User_talk:Sphilbrick#Gary_Lefkowith --S Philbrick(Talk) 19:17, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
AN/I
[edit]
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Muffled Pocketed 11:27, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Douglas Docker / The Docker's Guild
[edit]Thanks for your help trying to clean up this mess of a page. I would urge you to reconsider your decision to give up on editing, but I understand how frustrating it is to be constantly harrased by a WP:SPA and WP:OWNER who is hostile to any edit not made by his or herself. It's a shame that such a great artist is being railroaded by a lone vandal :( AFJP FAN 420 (talk) 19:14, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Coming from someone who fabricates references and has just been blocked because of it that's pretty rich :) Janthana (talk) 20:38, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Jesus Christ..LEAVE ME OUT OF THIS. TAKE YOUR STUPID DRAMA ELSEWHERE. Mystic Technocrat (talk) 22:01, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
October 2016
[edit]
Please refrain from changing genres, as you did to St. Anger, without providing a source or establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Thank you. - Mlpearc (open channel) 18:07, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
- No genre was changed. A genre was added. But not about to get in a needless edit war. Mystic Technocrat (talk) 18:15, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
- Added, removed makes no difference, all changes to genre's require reliable sources and consensus. - Mlpearc (open channel) 18:22, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
- No genre was changed. A genre was added. But not about to get in a needless edit war. Mystic Technocrat (talk) 18:15, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
NBA transactions
[edit]Aren’t updated until they are announced by the team - they aren’t official until then. Please wait before updating these as the deal is not final. Thanks. Rikster2 (talk) 18:12, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Rival Sons Associated Acts
[edit]Mystic. You continuously delete associated acts from Rival Sons when those acts were already present. While you may disagree with their presence, it is your responsibility via Wikipedia edit guidelines to initiate a talk page. You are conducting an “edit war” a violation of guidelines. You are not to remove the acts without initiating a talk yourself. Those acts also fit perfectly fine within the guidelines. If you read the information in the actual article, you’d even find that one of the associated bands you continue to delete is Veruca Salt, a band the drummer of Rival Sons was part of. I have already mentioned this to admin and I will continue to do so, as you are conducting a violation of editing guidelines. Thank you. Sirsentence (talk) 19:54, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Your recent editing history 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 are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the 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. Sirsentence (talk) 20:01, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
EXCUSE ME??? Homey, I posted an entry on the Rival Sons talk page well over a month ago. YOU have refused to engage on that talk page. Mystic Technocrat (talk) 20:08, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sirsentence (talk • contribs) 2018-10-24T20:39:53 (UTC)
Mystic. I advise you to read the citations of the actual article that clearly defined the significance those acts have to the career of Rival Sons. You must not have read anything given you deleted Veruca Salt multiple times in the past until I informed you of its significance through their drummer. Please read everything before you make your edits. Sirsentence (talk) 02:18, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
I will only respond to you on the Rival Sons talk page from here on out. For some steange reason, you refuse to engage there.
Edit warring at Rival Sons
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 01:04, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
I don't mind the block; as I said I came to the debate with unclean hands. What I do mind is that you've done nothing to resolve the issue. The reported user has NOT engaged on the subject's talk page, and has in fact lied about his/her actions. The associated acts he/she added are so egregious that they amount to spam. Please advise on who or what I should do to actually have someone look at the clearly violative content. I am not interested in edit warring. I am interested in a neutral third party weighing in on the content. Thanks in advance for your response. Mystic Technocrat (talk)
- When you return to editing, the steps of WP:Dispute resolution are open to you. WP:3O will sometimes attract a neutral third party. There are also some WikiProject pages where music issues get discussed. Be careful of accusing others of misbehavior, even on your own talk page ('lied about his/her actions', 'spam') since WP:ASPERSIONS can lead to blocks in their own right. EdJohnston (talk) 01:43, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]
Hello, Mystic Technocrat. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |