User talk:GhostOfLippe
- Welcome!
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Editing tutorial
- Picture tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Naming conventions
- Simplified Manual of Style
- Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia
- Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
- Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
- Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
- No edit warring or sock puppetry.
- If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
- Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
- Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.
The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Please be aware that medicine articles have a stricter sourcing policy - primary sources are rarely usable. --Six words (talk) 14:50, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
December 2012
Your recent editing history at Homeopathy shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.
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. Jojalozzo 17:11, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#GhostOfLippe reported by User:William_M. Connolley .28Result:_.29 William M. Connolley (talk) 17:47, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- GhostOfLippe, from the above report it looks like you have broken the WP:3RR rule at Homeopathy on December 14. You may still be able to avoid sanctions if you will agree to take a break from editing the article (or any other topics related to Homeopathy) for two weeks. If you accept this offer please reply in the above report. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 18:19, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- Please see the result of the 3RR case at WP:AN3#GhostOfLippe reported by User:William M. Connolley (Result: Warned, notified under WP:ARBPS). You are warned not to make any edits on the topic of homeopathy in the next seven days unless they are supported by a talk page consensus. I'm also leaving you a warning of the discretionary sanctions under WP:ARBPS, below. EdJohnston (talk) 21:15, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Discretionary sanctions on Pseudoscience topics
The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to pseudoscience. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, satisfy any standard of behavior, or follow any normal editorial process. If you continue to misconduct yourself on pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read at the "Final decision" section of the decision page.
Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice is given by an uninvolved administrator and will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system.
See also the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Homeopathy#Standard discretionary sanctions, which places the topic of homeopathy under the remedies of the Pseudoscience case. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 21:21, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
GhostOfLippe, you are invited to the Teahouse
|
Hi GhostOfLippe! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |