User talk:Swyper

Welcome!

Hello, Swyper, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Andrew Jacobs (journalist) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Fu]], amongst others, has accused Jacobs of making journalistic distortions in his articles<ref>[http://www.chinaaid.org/2013/07/chinaaid-president-bob-fu-responds-to.html ChinaAid President Bob

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:44, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Jacobs

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Andrew Jacobs (journalist). Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Jim1138 (talk) 22:02, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jim. I've explained my changes in the talk page. As it stood, much of the page was plagiarized. Swyper (talk) 03:07, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. - Barek (talk • contribs) - 03:23, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

The following is copied from talk page of Jim1138: "Hi Jim. I have removed excess passages in the article such as, for example, a series of sentences quoting reviews about Jacobs' film because it is not an appropriate place to put them; the article is about the person, not about the film. It does not make sense to have a whole paragraph lavishing praise on the film here. As another issue, Nellie2011 has removed biographical information about the subject's background, which clearly belongs in the article. Thus, I have reverted these changes. I have also tried to pare down and keep the content of some other sentences because they were clearly copied verbatim from NYTimes and other sources and I feel that such plagiarism is not acceptable here." Swyper (talk) 03:27, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You are blocked for edit warring; you'll need to address that, and only that, in your unblock request. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 05:17, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

@Swyper: Would you please provide links to diffs of the plagiarism in the article and links to to the original sources? John Reaves 03:33, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how to do this, so I'll just post the appropriate passages here: "Andrew Jacobs has been a staff writer at the New York Times for the past 10 years, where he has covered a wide variety of beats, from the American South and the aftermath of Sept. 11, to New Jersey politics and the New York City Police Department." taken from http://fourseasonsmovie.com/?page_id=43 versus "Jacobs covered a number of different beats at The Times, including the American South, New York City Police Department, Manhattan Criminal Courts and New Jersey politics" from Nellie2011's latest version. I've tried to change the wording a bit (i.e. remove "beats") to make the sentences sound less similar. Swyper (talk) 03:49, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]