User talk:Tboy2000

April 2015

Hello, I'm Keilana. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Zig Zag Girl— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 21:12, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Zig Zag Girl 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. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 21:19, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not censored. There is content on Wikipedia that exposes secret information, provided the secrets come from reliable sources. The Zig Zag Girl article bases its content on a Fox television show and a performance on that show. Thus, the Wikipedia article is not publishing original research or disclosure. —C.Fred (talk) 21:32, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In one of your edit summaries, you said that "The Magic Circle own the rights to illusion". I'm not sure what sense of "ownership" you're referring to, since I believe there is no legally enforceable ownership right to the secret of how a magic trick works (at least not once the secret is leaked into the public domain, and this particular horse left the barn a long time ago). Anyhow, I suggest that if you have further comments about the issue, that you discuss your views at Talk:Zig Zag Girl. Simply trying to repeatedly remove the information from Wikipedia will probably just leave you frustrated and will make you highly unpopular with the Wikipedia community. —BarrelProof (talk) 23:00, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, if you have some documentary evidence that "The Magic Circle own the rights to illusion", it would be interesting to see that evidence. —BarrelProof (talk) 23:01, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that I believe you have violated the WP:Three revert rule. That is generally not considered acceptable behavior on Wikipedia. —BarrelProof (talk) 23:18, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tboy2000, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Tboy2000! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! ChamithN (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:30, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]