Open main menu

Contents

WelcomeEdit

Hello, Seanbonner, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking   if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field with your edits. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Guillaume2303 (talk) 07:54, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles
Miscellaneous

October 2015Edit

  Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to National Rifle Association. Your edits constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 17:37, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

TST articleEdit

You described my edit as "vandalism", which is super uncool. Instead of starting a revert war, you should have posted on the Talk page rather than unilaterally re-adding the disputed material. Please go comment: Talk:The_Satanic_Temple#Irrelevant_material_in_History_section.3F  — Demong talk 06:29, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

@Demong: You deleted cited text because you disagree with it, that's vandalism. If you don't like the tone of the text edit it, don't just delete everything that doesn't fit your narrative. Seanbonner (talk) 07:01, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Important distinction: I disagree with its inclusion on a Wikipedia article. I also think the citations are bad sources. Please comment on the article Talk page, not here.
PS: Please do not accuse another editor of being a vandal, or having an agenda, unless you have clear evidence of bad faith.  — Demong talk 07:05, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

November 2017Edit

Your recent editing history at Lucien Greaves 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 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 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.
If the other user is reverting in bad faith, the best thing to do is to report that user. The 3 revert rule applies to everyone in an edit war, regardless of who is in the right. Best to let others take care of it. If you'd like more information on the proper venues, let me know.Rhododendrites talk \\ 07:18, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

@Rhododendrites: I'm currently trying to understand how to report the other user but am confused as I've never done it before. As you can see Dominiusol is a brand new account whose edits have been exclusively deleting my edits on several articles and attacking me on the talk pages of those articles. Thankfully Jim1138 stepped in to help on one page already but this behavior is happening on several pages at once. Seanbonner (talk) 07:26, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
On Lucien Greaves I see Dominiusol adding a bunch of [arguably overdetailed and/or a little promotional] content, which did not remove what you had previously contributed. You then removed much of that, and then it was off to the races. That doesn't quite jibe with the idea that Diminiusol is only here to undo your work? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 07:30, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
@Rhododendrites: You are right that on Lucien Greaves Dominiusol was adding text not removing it, however if you look on the talk page you'll see that the text was there previously and we discussed it being too much like a CV and needed to be more neutral so I removed it in that context. Adding it back is "undoing" my edits so to speak. On The Satanic Temple the edits are much more obvious where massive chunks of my text were removed without citation or discussion. Again, looking at the talk page you can clearly see Dominiusol attacking me, assuming bias and claiming all of my edits were invalid. Both of these articles were very press release feeling and adding legitimate and cited details that aren't flattering isn't vandalism, it's helping make an article more more neutral. Looking at Dominiusol's contributions you can clearly see it's a new account and the only edits it's made have been to change mine. Seanbonner (talk) 16:17, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

@Rhododendrites: For my part I'm frustrated that Seanbonner seems dedicated to adding material of a negative POV and deleting very basic uncontested facts. I feel this needs some moderator intervention Dominiusol (talk) 07:34, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

To me, it does look like a content dispute (i.e. not a matter of a user out to get another user). The fact that both of your accounts are fairly well dedicated to this subject means any report from/by either of you will lead to scrutiny for both of you. Given you're both past WP:3RR an admin (I am not an admin btw) would be well within Wikipedia policy to block both of you. It looks like you have Jim1138's attention (and mine as well), so perhaps the best thing to do is to break down the issues on the talk page and let the article stand for now, with the understanding that it won't just be a two-person back-and-forth and concerns/suggestions will be discussed. I find TST a fascinating project, but don't feel like I have a strong opinion, so if you want a third opinion ping me. It's just a really bad idea to repeatedly add or remove the same material. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 07:46, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

The Satanic TempleEdit

Has been PP. Setup your email. WP:ENABLEEMAIL. Preferably, use a "disposable" email address. If you reply to a wiki email, the receiver will get your true email address. Cheers Jim1138 (talk)

@Jim1138: Email set up. Thank you. Seanbonner (talk) 23:25, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Dispute resolutionEdit

Good refs are wp:BRD and wp:DR Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 19:50, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Please do not delete referenced informationEdit

"Ultimately the body of affiliated Church of Satan "Satanists" is a small one, with conservative estimates running as little as three hundred (Boulware 1998: 6) to one thousand (Introvigne 1997: 80), which although disappointingly small, are much more manageable than ranges of seven thousand (Lyons 1970: 174) to ten to twenty thousand (Kahaner 1988: 68)." Mvaldemar (talk) 10:53, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

@Mvaldemar:I didn't delete it, I checked your citation and found that you misquoted it, so I corrected it then looked up the sourced and added the additional information, I detailed all of that on the talk page.Seanbonner (talk) 11:00, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Please don't delete reliable academic sources.Mvaldemar (talk) 12:38, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
So weird, I feel like I've been telling you that all day. Seanbonner (talk) 12:42, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

November 2017Edit

Your recent editing history at Church of Satan 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 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 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. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:46, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Church of Satan. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
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 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 ~~~~}}.  ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:49, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
@Oshwah: Thank you! I've been waiting for an editor to step in all day. I've been posting on the talk page and the other user is ignoring comments and continuing to delete cited sources and information. Please help. Seanbonner (talk) 12:52, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Church of SatanEdit

Let's not start an edit war again. Please explain what was wrong with my edit. Mvaldemar (talk) 09:24, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

@Mvaldemar: Please don't litter up my user page, take this discussion to the talk page of the article where it is appropriate. Seanbonner (talk) 09:41, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Done. Let's continue the discussion there. Mvaldemar (talk) 09:45, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:British JewsEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:British Jews. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Church of SatanEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Church of Satan. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:FatimaEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fatima. Legobot (talk) 04:34, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:The Bible and violenceEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:The Bible and violence. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2017–18 Iranian protestsEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2017–18 Iranian protests. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

AN3Edit

FYI: WP:AN3#User:Demong reported by User:Jim1138 (Result: ) Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 00:40, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:The Satanic TempleEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:The Satanic Temple. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussionEdit

  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. Thank you.  — Demong talk 00:01, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Thread: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Seanbonner_reported_by_User:Demong_(Result:_)  — Demong talk 00:06, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

January 2018Edit

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
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 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 ~~~~}}.  NeilN talk to me 00:43, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Seanbonner (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

I did not violate 3:RR, I reverted incorrect deletions of several different details, that is not cause for a ban. Seanbonner (talk) 00:52, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You don't have to violate the 3RR policy for your edits to constitute edit warring. 3RR exists as a blight-line rule in order to "define a line" for editors where, if crossed, would typically be considered edit warring and the violation actionable. You were warned above, and the edits continued despite this. This is why I believe that the block applied by NeilN was fair. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:58, 19 January 2018 (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.

(edit conflict) You were reported for edit warring. You reverted twice more while that report was being processed. You were blocked for edit warring. --NeilN talk to me 00:59, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

 
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Seanbonner (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

I was reported for edit warning by someone who has been blocked previously for edit warring, and in his report he noted that he didn't know if it fit. Adding a new section is not a revert, I reverted after the section was deleted without discussion. I didn't touch the section mentioned in the report after it was filed, I edited the page in other areas and and reverted a change that had replaced a cited fact with someone's assumption. These were all independent edits in different areas that have not been controversial in anyway. Suggesting that fixing a date in an unrelated section is edit warning is unreasonable. Seanbonner (talk) 01:05, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I see clear reverts at 00:41, 00:31, 23:38, 23:16 and, technically, the 00:43 the previous day was within 24 hours. It does not matter that the reverts are on different material. Amazingly, two of those reverts occurred while you were discussing your actions at the edit warring noticeboard. Now is a good time to stop and read the policy you violated. Kuru (talk) 01:17, 19 January 2018 (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.

Minor correction: I have never been blocked for edit warring. — Demong talk 01:16, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

I gave you a choice here. You obviously didn't take the option that would've left you unblocked so here we are. --NeilN talk to me 01:12, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:The Satanic TempleEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:The Satanic Temple. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Coachella Valley ChurchEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Coachella Valley Church. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Christianity in IranEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Christianity in Iran. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:How Long, Not LongEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:How Long, Not Long. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Racism in the United StatesEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Racism in the United States. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:PolyandryEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Polyandry. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Faith healingEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Faith healing. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Muslim conquests of the Indian subcontinentEdit

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Islam-related articlesEdit

Please comment on Talk:Noah's ArkEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Noah's Ark. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Linda SarsourEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Linda Sarsour. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:British JewsEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:British Jews. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Al-AhbashEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Al-Ahbash. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Christian ethicsEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Christian ethics. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Political activity of the Knights of ColumbusEdit

Please comment on Talk:Political activity of the Knights of ColumbusEdit

Please comment on Talk:Novum OrganumEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Novum Organum. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bochasanwasi Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan SansthaEdit

Please comment on Talk:People's Mujahedin of IranEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Shenphen RinpocheEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Shenphen Rinpoche. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Antisemitism in the UK Labour PartyEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Antisemitism in the UK Labour Party. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Islam in South AsiaEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Islam in South Asia. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Dissent from Catholic teaching on homosexualityEdit

Please comment on Talk:D. H. LawrenceEdit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:D. H. Lawrence. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Seanbonner".