Skrippner

Welcome!

Hello, Skrippner, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome!

Reference Errors on 20 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Stanley Krippner page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:33, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

November 2014

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Stanley Krippner, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Ad Orientem (talk) 01:18, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Stanley Krippner has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. This edit

• 14:55, 18 November 2014 (UTC) "m (Fixing reference error raised by ReferenceBot)"

was marked minor that was patently false which is a violation of policy. The edit summary indicated it was a repair of references also false. Misleading edit summaries are a violation of policy. Conflict of interest editing directly to an article without discussion on talk first is also not in keeping with policy. Bring your issues to the talk page of the article and seek consensus. MrBill3 (talk) 15:33, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Please do not assume ownership of articles as you did at Stanley Krippner. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you. Dawn Bard (talk) 16:17, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Stanley Krippner 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.— BranStark (talk) 16:18, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

• Per our conflict of interest guidelines, please cease editing this article, and especially stop edit warring over it. Use the talk page to constructively suggest and request changes. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 16:21, 18 November 2014 (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:Skrippner reported by User:MrBill3 (Result: ). Thank you. MrBill3 (talk) 16:21, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

November 2014

You have been blocked from editing for a period of one week for violating WP:3RR at Stanley Krippner and making personal attacks. 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.  Bbb23 (talk) 17:55, 18 November 2014 (UTC)