MetalMan2015

January 2015

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Dominion: Tank Police. - You have been warned countless times about the process for moving an article. You are continually ignoring the advice which you have been given, so your edits will be regarded as deliberately disruptive. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:14, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Dominion and other issues

Whether you like it or not the title of the page contains Tank Police so that must be in line one per WP:LEDE. If you want the page moved,muon must fill out a request per WP:RM. And I know that you copied my user oage and pasted it as your own with what you claim to be your own personal details. There has been only one other person on Wikipedia to do this and it was clear he was not here to contribute constructively. You may have added information across the project, but your behavior is showing otherwise. Fix the dominion pages per policies and guidelines. Let your user page be started from scratch with no resemblance to mine. And do not disrupt Wikipedia just because I figured you out.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 13:14, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

I have not disrupted Wikipedia. I am removing your vandalism of reverting to false revisions.--MetalMan2015 (talk) 13:16, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

January 2015

Your recent editing history at Dominion: Tank Police 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. Strongjam (talk) 13:31, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. 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.

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.  CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 15:46, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Although the blocking summary says edit warring the block was in part due to the continued disruptive copy and past move. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 15:51, 8 January 2015 (UTC)