Jump to content

User talk:Copulative: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎January 2015: friendly notice
Notice: Gamergate general sanctions notification. (TW)
Line 49: Line 49:


[[File:Information orange.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Also, removing sources is a no no on WP. its ok to add new ones.--[[User:Wuerzele|Wuerzele]] ([[User talk:Wuerzele|talk]]) 07:17, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
[[File:Information orange.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Also, removing sources is a no no on WP. its ok to add new ones.--[[User:Wuerzele|Wuerzele]] ([[User talk:Wuerzele|talk]]) 07:17, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

== January 2015 ==
{{Ivmbox
|'''Please read this notification carefully:'''<br>A [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive265#Proposed Gamergate solution by Hasteur|community discussion]] has authorised the use of [[Wikipedia:General sanctions|general sanctions]] for pages related to the [[Gamergate controversy]],&nbsp;such as [[:Talk:Gamergate controversy]], which you have recently edited.<br>The details of these sanctions are described [[Wikipedia:General sanctions/Gamergate|here]].

[[Wikipedia:General sanctions|General sanctions]] is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means [[WP:INVOLVED|uninvolved]] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|purpose of Wikipedia]], our [[:Category:Wikipedia conduct policies|standards of behaviour]], or relevant [[Wikipedia:List of policies|policies]]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as [[Wikipedia:Editing restrictions#Types of restrictions|editing restrictions]], [[Wikipedia:Banning policy#Types of bans|bans]], or [[WP:Blocking policy|blocks]]. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged [[Wikipedia:General sanctions/Gamergate#Log of notifications|here]]. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.
| Commons-emblem-notice.svg
| icon size = 50px}} [[User:Strongjam|Strongjam]] ([[User talk:Strongjam|talk]]) 18:13, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:13, 23 January 2015

Welcome to my talk page. Post any messages and whatnot below and be sure to use a signature.

January 2015

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting conspiracy theories 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. McSly (talk) 18:57, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

With respect to the material that you are seeking to add, it is raw data from an FBI report to which you have added the commentary that "it should be noted" that no murders were reported. This is clearly synthesis and not permitted by the policy to which I just linked. Coretheapple (talk) 19:09, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to California does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks!--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:27, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Moffett Field

Information icon Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks!

Information icon Also, removing sources is a no no on WP. its ok to add new ones.--Wuerzele (talk) 07:17, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2015

Please read this notification carefully:
A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Gamergate controversy, such as Talk:Gamergate controversy, which you have recently edited.
The details of these sanctions are described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

Strongjam (talk) 18:13, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]