User talk:Ideloctober: Difference between revisions
Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on George Lincoln Rockwell. (TW) |
|||
Line 82: | Line 82: | ||
Ask Jobrot, he's the one who stated he was a Liberal while expressing very favorable views on Marxism. Modern Feminism, Progressivism, and Liberalism all blend Marx's views with their own agendas, ignoring the fact that Marx himself would've laughed at them at worst, considered them useful idiots at best. I guess capitalism is awful and the ideology that's led to the deaths of over 100,000,000 innocents is the true path of enlightenment. [[User:Ideloctober|Ideloctober]] ([[User talk:Ideloctober#top|talk]]) 22:25, 7 August 2015 (UTC) |
Ask Jobrot, he's the one who stated he was a Liberal while expressing very favorable views on Marxism. Modern Feminism, Progressivism, and Liberalism all blend Marx's views with their own agendas, ignoring the fact that Marx himself would've laughed at them at worst, considered them useful idiots at best. I guess capitalism is awful and the ideology that's led to the deaths of over 100,000,000 innocents is the true path of enlightenment. [[User:Ideloctober|Ideloctober]] ([[User talk:Ideloctober#top|talk]]) 22:25, 7 August 2015 (UTC) |
||
:No I didn't (for starters I wouldn't describe myself as ''"a Liberal"''). Stop claiming I'vs said things that I haven't. --[[User:Jobrot|Jobrot]] ([[User talk:Jobrot|talk]]) 00:35, 8 August 2015 (UTC) |
:No I didn't (for starters I wouldn't describe myself as ''"a Liberal"''). Stop claiming I'vs said things that I haven't. --[[User:Jobrot|Jobrot]] ([[User talk:Jobrot|talk]]) 00:35, 8 August 2015 (UTC) |
||
== August 2015 == |
|||
[[File:Stop hand nuvola.svg|30px|left|alt=Stop icon]] Your recent editing history at [[:George Lincoln Rockwell]] shows that you are currently engaged in an [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|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 [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines|talk page]] to work toward making a version that represents [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See [[Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle|BRD]] for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant [[Wikipedia:Noticeboards|noticeboard]] or seek [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary [[Wikipedia:Protection policy|page protection]]. |
|||
'''Being involved in an edit war can result in your being [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked from editing]]'''—especially if you violate the [[Wikipedia:Edit warring#The three-revert rule|three-revert rule]], which states that an editor must not perform more than three [[Help:Reverting|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.{{Break}}''You have exceeded 3rr on the article. Also, you CANNOT use blogs as sources on Wikipedia. Especially about [[WP:FRINGE|fringe]] theories.''<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> [[User:DD2K|Dave Dial]] ([[User talk:DD2K|talk]]) 02:50, 8 August 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 02:50, 8 August 2015
Welcome Ideloctober!
Some pages of helpful information to get you started: | Some common sense Dos and Don'ts:
|
If you need further help, you can: | or you can: | or even: |
Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type {{helpme}}
here on your talk page, and someone will try to help.
There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:
|
|
Remember to always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes (~~~~)
at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to this (your talk) page, and a timestamp.
To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own private sandbox for use any time. Perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put
{{My sandbox}}
on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.Sincerely, Dominoooo's (talk) 11:06, 4 August 2015 (UTC) (Leave me a message)
Mentioned at Administrative Incidents Noticeboard
Due to your continued uncooperative behaviour and failure to listen with good faith to your fellow editors or read basic wikipedia policies, I've raised your name at the Administrative Incidents Noticeboard. The thread can be accessed here: [1] --Jobrot (talk) 08:29, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
I'll see you in "court" then, my little Red Friend. Ideloctober (talk) 09:19, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
A strange connection
I would be fascinated to know how you can claim that someone can be both a liberal and a marxist. Marxism is highly illiberal, indeed quite unambiguously opposed to liberalism, and Marx's writings frequently castigate his political opponents for being liberal. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:32, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Ask Jobrot, he's the one who stated he was a Liberal while expressing very favorable views on Marxism. Modern Feminism, Progressivism, and Liberalism all blend Marx's views with their own agendas, ignoring the fact that Marx himself would've laughed at them at worst, considered them useful idiots at best. I guess capitalism is awful and the ideology that's led to the deaths of over 100,000,000 innocents is the true path of enlightenment. Ideloctober (talk) 22:25, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- No I didn't (for starters I wouldn't describe myself as "a Liberal"). Stop claiming I'vs said things that I haven't. --Jobrot (talk) 00:35, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
August 2015
Your recent editing history at George Lincoln Rockwell 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.
You have exceeded 3rr on the article. Also, you CANNOT use blogs as sources on Wikipedia. Especially about fringe theories. Dave Dial (talk) 02:50, 8 August 2015 (UTC)