User talk:VictoriaR2020

Edit warring

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. IronGargoyle (talk) 20:34, 14 August 2012 (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. Thank you. MacAddct1984 ^{(talk  contribs)} 20:47, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule at Lesley Arfin. 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. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 00:46, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

VictoriaR2020 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am requesting that this account is unblocked. I already posted the content 3 times before I was made aware of the policy by Richie. The rules will be followed closely in the future. Also, the content I put on the page is being targeted for deletion by several accounts for no valid reason. Reputable sources are called "questionable" and the content insignificant. i would like to discuss this with an uninvolved party that can "objectively" explain which sources are credible and what type of information is "insignificant"VictoriaR2020 (talk) 01:15, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Unblocked per the condition that no further reverts be made to the Lesley Arfin article until 00:46, 16 August 2012 (UTC) and that this notice remain visible on this talk page until that time. —C.Fred (talk) 02:14, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You were aware of the policy; the sequence of comments at Talk:Lesley Arfin show that you knew about the policy before your last revert. That said, what assurance do we have that you will abide by policy? If you're unblocked, would you accept a restriction of no further reverts to the Lesley Arfin article until your block would have expired? —C.Fred (talk) 01:28, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I said I already posted the content 3 times before I was made aware of the policy by Richie which means that BEFORE Richie explained that policy my account could have (rightly) been blocked anyway because I had already exceeded the limit-which I did not know BEFORE it was brought to my attention. I will stop reverting for the period of the block (24 hours), but I would like a stronger reasoning for the removal of the content than what was given, so I intend to use the talk page.

Right. Had you stopped, you wouldn't have been blocked; the revert you made after you were aware of the policy was what led to the block. That said, I am unblocking you so you may join in the discussion at the article talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 02:14, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also 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 useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:39, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!--VictoriaR2020 (talk) 02:41, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]