JMDonovan

Welcome

Hello, JMDonovan, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. SMP0328. Happy editing! SMP0328. (talk) 02:01, 3 May 2009 (UTC) Getting started Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page How you can help Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

Barack Obama

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Talk:Barack Obama, is on article probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you.

I hope that you have read and understood the information on the "article probation" page, because that will make it easier for you to contribute without causing disruption or damage to Wikipedia. You should be aware that if you do cause disruption, an administrator may without further warning ban you from editing Obama-related articles, or block you from editing altogether.

Now I would like to point out a couple of important issues. Firstly, the top-level article Barack Obama is a biography article. It is written in "summary style" which means that it only contains the information which editors feel is most important about Obama's life. Other articles deal with more specific issues, and in particular this article is not meant to include whatever latest talking point the news media are covering today. Some issues may be important enough to be mentioned in other articles - such as Presidency of Barack Obama which, as you might guess, covers matters which are important within the scope of his presidency rather than his life - but nothing you have so far mentioned is anywhere near important enough to be covered by the top level biography. In future, if you want to suggest additions to Obama related articles, you might want to post at WP:WikiProject Barack Obama for help.

Secondly, you need to know about our policy on biographies of living persons (BLPs). Editors are not allowed to add unsourced or poorly-sourced information about living persons anywhere on Wikipedia. You are not allowed either to write your own personal opinions or to copy those of bloggers or other unreliable sources. Enforcement of this policy tends to be quite strict, and you have arguably overstepped the mark with comments such as "Barack Obama has hired an expensive team of lawyers to keep his long-form birth certificate from public view". That statement is contenious, potentially defamatory, and not verifiable.

You will just have to accept that Wikipedia is not, and will not be, a platform for editors to air their personal views. Please find ways to contribute more neutral material. Thank you. SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 13:27, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Quo warranto

I've again reverted your addition of information to the article, because it has little connection to the subject of the article. Quo warranto writs are filed all the time, and even ones against prominent figures aren't relevant to the article on the legal proceedings. Per the WP:BRD cycle, it would be best if instead of inserting the information again, you discuss it on the talk page. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:23, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing.

Edit warring..

I've reported your actions on Quo warranto to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring in the section Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:JMDonovan reported by User:Ealdgyth (Result: ) Ealdgyth - Talk 21:38, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Block

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule at Quo warranto. 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. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Jamie❤S93 22:04, 8 December 2009 (UTC)