User talk:Nyth83/Archives/2015/July
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Nyth83. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Misty Edwards
I posted Misty Edwards on WikiAlpha.The Cross Bearer (talk) 04:15, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia library Newspapers.com renewal
Your free one-year account with Newspapers.com will end on August 7 2015. Newspapers.com has offered to extend existing accounts by another year. If you wish to keep your account until August 7 2016, please add your name to the Account Renewal list here. I'll let Newspapers.com customer support know, and they will extend your subscription. If you don't want to keep your account for another year, you don't have to do anything. Your account will expire unless I hear from you that you want to keep it. All the best, HazelAB (talk) 15:05, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Nyth83. Would you please not restore improperly sourced content to Echosmith? As I tried to explain, you need both solid sources and you need to persuade other editors that an exception to WP:BLPPRIVACY should be permitted. Also, when editors object to you edits, you should seek consensus for your edits and not simply restore them repeatedly (see WP:BURDEN). Please also read WP:EW if you are not already familiar with it.- MrX 15:49, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
July 2015
Your recent editing history at Echosmith 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.
You are way over the limit on reverts. I strongly recommend that you self-revert. - MrX 01:15, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
- No, I am claiming exemption under the valdalism rule.
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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Nyth83 reported by User:MrX (Result: ). Thank you. - MrX 02:03, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
July 2015
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.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. ceradon (talk • contribs) 03:46, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Nyth83/Archives/2015 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
need to be able to continue discussion on disputed content of Echosmith Nyth63 03:58, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Whilst the intent to continue discussion is admirable, you have not addressed the edit-warring that led to your block. Yunshui 雲水 09:05, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
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.
Nyth83/Archives/2015 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Ironic that I was attempting to post a second response to the edit war report by MrX and my account was blocked before I could post it. MrX presented a very one-sided view of the edit history of Echosmith. The first two reverts were made to add sources and address the issue raised by the first two editors. The following reverts of the other editors were then reverts of vandalism which is a listed exception. The 'discussion' there has still not addressed the fundamental question and has degenerated almost to incivility by the TheRedPenOfDoom where that editor is now posting comments that I cannot respond to. Nyth63 11:24, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Your account of events does not agree with observable reality. In particular, the edits you reverted were not vandalism. Also, did you take the advice to read the guide to appealing blocks before requesting an unblock? If you did, you will have seen the section WP:NOTTHEM. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:17, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
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.