User talk:Snowgolf

File permission problem with File:Tina Blomme, the inventor of Snowgolf, playing on the First Official Snowgolf Course in Quebec, Canada.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Tina Blomme, the inventor of Snowgolf, playing on the First Official Snowgolf Course in Quebec, Canada.jpg, which you've attributed to www.snowgolf.net/. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:48, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

November 2016

Hello, I'm Justeditingtoday. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Justeditingtoday (talk) 23:08, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are you kidding me??? I have spent my life putting this together and you have the nerve to delete my updates? If you do it again I will report you.

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Snow golf. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. NOTNOTABLE (talk) 23:30, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at Snow golf, you may be blocked from editing. NOTNOTABLE (talk) 23:33, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Your recent editing history at Snow golf 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. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 23:38, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Snowgolf reported by User:Velella (Result: ). Thank you. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 23:48, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

November 2016

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. NOTNOTABLE (talk) 23:54, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for edit warring to engage in promotion, advertising, or advocacy, which appears to be your only purpose, to the exclusion of building an encyclopedia. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:54, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your best bet for being unblocked is to agree to a topic ban from the Snow Golf article and talk page. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:54, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Snow golf. -Liance^{talk/contribs} 23:56, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I made small factual changes and you kept deleting my changes as a clear way to enter and editing war. You have been reported.

No... You were reported, which lead to me blocking you. "I'm (supposedly) right" is not an exemption of our Three Revert Rule. Your only chance of being unblocked is to agree to never edit the Snow Golf article or talk page. Trying to argue that you are right is only a waste of your time, because no one is going to unblock you if you plan to go back to that page. You are welcome to edit other articles, but you've shown serious ownership and edit warring problems with that particular page. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:28, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia keeps notifying me that you're sending me emails. My email service has not yet processed them. I can't imagine that it's something that you really can't just post on here. If it's personal information that you do not want made public here, that really is not going to get you unblocked. I do not care who you are, all that matters is how you behaved here. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:36, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]