Chicora26

June 2021

Hello, I'm Uranium Site. I noticed that you recently removed content from Josh Kimbrell without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Uranium Site (talk) 20:55, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Josh Kimbrell, you may be blocked from editing. Uranium Site (talk) 20:57, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Uranium Site (talk) 20:58, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  331dot (talk) 21:03, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Legal threats are not permitted on Wikipedia. We cannot stop you from pursuing legal action, but you cannot make legal threats on Wikipedia and you may not edit if you have a legal action underway. You can pursue your grievances in the courts or on Wikipedia, but not both. We are willing to hear your grievances with the article about you, but if you want to do that, you must withdraw any and all legal threats. 331dot (talk) 21:06, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

If you choose to pursue your grievances on Wikipedia, you will need to prove your identity by following the instructions at WP:REALNAME(if you send an email from an official SC government account that will suffice). 331dot (talk) 21:10, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Justification for our "legal threats" policy,

Wikipedia is a crowdsourced endeavor, and basically all of us are unpaid volunteers. None of us can legally represent the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF). This means that when you make a legal threat, we have no choice except to block you and ask you to communicate with the professional representatives of the WMF. If you choose to rescind your threat, we can go back to trying to help you. -Arch dude (talk) 23:58, 26 June 2021 (UTC)