50.184.134.157

Please discuss your comments and concerns at the O'Brien article talk page. Do not keep reverting and edit warring. Thank you, -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 22:59, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

I am going to revert your edits. The edits I made are non-controversial removal of unsourced content. You are the one that is edit-warring and impeding progress on this article. 50.184.134.157 (talk) 23:03, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

March 2015

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Walter O'Brien. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount and can lead to a block, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 23:17, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Talk:Walter O'Brien

Please do not make comments such as this, as they are in violation of Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living people. That policy applies to all components of Wikipedia, including "talk" pages and including edit summaries. Thank you. Coretheapple (talk) 23:27, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

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:50.184.134.157 reported by User:Winkelvi (Result: ). Thank you. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 23:28, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

March 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Swarm... ^—X— 23:37, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

• After I blocked you I saw your pledge to stop reverting in order to discuss the issue. As such, I've unblocked you in order to allow you to collaboratively discuss your issues in good faith. Please stay true to your word to refrain from further edit warring, and thank you. Swarm... ^—X— 23:41, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

OK, but Swarm, this user needs to undertake to adhere to WP:BLP. I'm not an editor on this article, I just bumbled into it by RfC bot, and before I knew it I see "charlatan" (referring to O'Brien) in an edit summary. Coretheapple (talk) 23:49, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

I fully agree and am keeping an eye on the situation. BLP violations will not be accepted whatsoever. Swarm... ^—X— 00:02, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

The contributions I made were sourced. 50.184.134.157 (talk) 00:03, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

March 2015 (3)

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Walter O'Brien. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Skyerise (talk) 02:14, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Please read WP:SPS. Exceptional claims require third-party sourcing. They may not be sourced to the subject's website. Skyerise (talk) 02:58, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for WP:BLP violations. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

--Ymblanter (talk) 12:01, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

---

Request reason:

There has obviously been a huge misunderstanding here. All I have done is made well-sourced contributions to the article on Walter O'brien, which is in need of serious work in order to meet any kind of encyclopedic standards. I was unaware of some specific, obscure policies such as WP:SYN and WP:SPS, but that doesn't mean I was editing in bad faith and should be blocked. The user Winkelvi repeatedly reverted my changes without explanation other than quoting the policy, which I had already read, and I couldn't figure out what to do. I have a strong argument for why WP:SPS doesn't apply to the changes I made, but nobody is willing to listen. Honestly, I think I'm done with Wikipedia if this is how hostile most editors are. Just making tiny mistakes is apparently worthy of being reported to notice boards and talked about in the third person, or with incorrect gender pronouns, as if I'm an idiot or a vandal or something. I can't imagine why anybody would consider contributing to this project given how unforgiving and unhelpful you are. 50.184.134.157 (talk) 21:05, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Decline reason:

The problem isn't that you weren't aware of WP:SYN, the problem is that you were aware and decided you simply could ignore it to call a living person a liar. If you really think you have a strong argument for doing so, you should not edit Wikipedia. Huon (talk) 01:26, 22 March 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.

---