User talk:NotTechimo

See RR talk page.

December 2014

Your recent editing history at ResellerRatings 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. HelloThereMinions ^{talk, contribs} 03:15, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's good that you're taking it to the talk page, but please do not revert another editor's revert until consensus is reached. Since you haven't been warned yet, you haven't been reported yet (Techimo is reported because of failure to heed the warning), but please discuss with other editors until consensus is reached. Thank you! HelloThereMinions ^{talk, contribs} 03:17, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The person waring with me is the former owner of the business. He simply will not allow anything that isn't glowing PR about the company into the article. I've tried to discuss this with him and he ignores the factual content and instead tries to spin that my edits represent a COI. If the former owner of a business removing factual edits by others isn't a COI, then I don't understand the term "conflict of interest."NotTechimo (talk) 15:26, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I concur on the part on he reverting despite not reaching consensus. While I'd rewrite your edit to be more neutral (e.g., not listing all the features and replacing terms like "ResellerRatings Customers Love Us" with more neutral text), it's only borderline bias, and consensus is needed in order for him to revert. HelloThereMinions ^{talk, contribs} 21:40, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for impersonating User:Techimo. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 04:16, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|1=I'm not impersonating anyone. I never once posted anything trying to impersonate another user. I specifically named myself NOTTechimo to differentiate myself from the user Techimo. I am not him, don't want to be him, and never claimed to be him. There is no post anywhere in which I've attempted to be Techimo. How can I impersonate someone with a negative of that name?! The block makes zero sense. <redacted> The article's history shows him constantly reverting edits, when factual data with better citations than I provided were included. I attempted to include factual information that exposes a different facet of the company, which he didn't like. He then engaged in an edit war with me, and involved admins to get <redacted> [the] page reverted back to nothing more than advertising. He has a distinct conflict of interest in editing that page and refuses to work together in a way that allows anything that isn't glowing praise of the company into the article.}}

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If you have already appealed to the Unblock Ticket Request System and been declined you may appeal to the Arbitration Committee's Ban Appeals Subcommittee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.