George john6868989

George john6868989, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi George john6868989! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join other new editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from other new editors. These editors have also just begun editing Wikipedia; they may have had similar experiences as you. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from your peers. I hope to see you there! Dathus (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:13, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

November 2014

Your recent editing history at Middle East Eye 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. GedUK  12:52, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Middle East Eye. 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.  Jackmcbarn (talk) 16:32, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Misrepresentation of a direct quotation

Regarding this edit [1] please note that under no circumstances is it ever appropriate to misrepresent a direct quotation. Any material in quotation marks must follow the words in the source cited. We do not 'quote' people for things they didn't say. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:52, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Blocked again

Not even an hour after your previous edit-warring block expired, you resumed your edit war with Special:Diff/635668426. As such, I've blocked you again, this time for a week. Once this block expires, don't immediately go edit that article again. Discuss your proposed changes on the talk page first and wait for them to get consensus. Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:53, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

November 2017

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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} 14:44, 30 November 2017 (UTC)