Mangetoutmangetout

February 2018

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Atlantic306 (talk) 16:32, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Please stop adding unsourced or badly sourced content. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Atlantic306 (talk) 16:36, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Rebecca Jane Brown. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 16:39, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

• You did violate a rule with this edit to Rebecca Jane Brown: the three-revert rule. Would you like to retract the edit yourself and discuss the matter at Talk:Rebecca Jane Brown, to prevent your account being blocked? —C.Fred (talk) 16:45, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

@C.Fred: The edit I made followed the rules, and the rule breaker was the person who removed my section and claimed I had incorrectly cited. I will leave my edit up as it is accurate and well-cited. Thank you @C.Fred: Message text. Mangetoutmangetout (talk) 16:58, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

No, you did not. You violated the three-revert rule (3RR), and there is no exception that you can claim. The other editor might be able to claim the BLP violation exception; I've asked them to explain their actions. —C.Fred (talk) 17:14, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

That said, your next step needs to be to explain why these are suitable examples of her vlogs at Talk:Rebecca Jane Brown. Do not add them back to the article again; otherwise, you will be blocked for violation of 3RR. —C.Fred (talk) 17:17, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

@C.Fred: Okay, I will not revert again today and had no intention of violating that rule. I apologise and thank you for your patience in trying to resolve this matter. It's important to point out, though, that the changes I've made are all good reliable sources, nothing I've added has been made up or plucked from thin air, I've added a valuable summary about the person who the article is about, and the claims that I poorly cited are wrong. A biography about a person is allowed to include information about that person that person themself has posted on their own YouTube account. I choe those examples as they are examples of some of her most-watched videos on her YouTube account. Perhaps I should have made that clear. Thank you again @C.Fred: Mangetoutmangetout (talk) 17:22, 24 February 2018 (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.

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 ~~~~}}.  Acroterion (talk) 18:10, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

{{unblock|reason=I was told by an admin that I could make another edit if I came to a consensus with the other person with whom I had a disagreement. We came to a consensus (see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rebecca_Jane_Brown) so I made my change. I don't feel this warrants a ban as we are no longer edit warring. [[User:Mangetoutmangetout|Mangetoutmangetout]] ([[User talk:Mangetoutmangetout#top|talk]]) 18:13, 24 February 2018 (UTC)}}

• • We did agree on the edit so I don't think the block is needed, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 18:17, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Your last edit was still substantially similar to what you've been edit-warring over, just pared back to avoid BLP violation. Atlantic306 isn't an admin. I am open to unblocking on the condition that you understand that you can't edit-war,a nd that you understand the biographies of living persons policy. Acroterion (talk) 18:50, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

@Acroterion:The admin I referred to was C.Fred, who said it was okay for me to make another edit following resolution of our dispute. If you follow the link I included, you'll see we did resolve it and the change I made to my proposed edit reflects that. I do understand the biographies of living persons policy. I have no intention to edit war. Mangetoutmangetout (talk) 19:04, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

@Acroterion: Someone has now deleted half of the Rebecca Jane Brown wikipedia page without warning and for no reason. You admins had previously accepted it and everything was fully cited. I'm blocked so can't edit it back (which I wouldn't have done in this 24 hour period anyway, of course!)

The user who removed the material, Huon, explained his reasoning on the talk page of the article. Huon's status as an administrator does not give any extra merit to the edit of the article; however, because Huon is an admin, we expect that he is familiar with Wikipedia policies like BLP and acceptable usage of primary sources. —C.Fred (talk) 20:01, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm still waiting for you to address my chief concern - that you were edit-warring to include material which other editors felt were violations of Wikipedia's biographical policies, in an article that has seen a substantial amount of disruptive editing in the recent past. Huon's removal reinforces my concerns that you're not sufficiently knowledgeable about Wikipedia policy. Please review the WP:BLP policy, as well as WP:V, WP:RS, WP:EW and WP:SYNTH, and please show me that you're prepared to abide by those policies. Then you can be unblocked. Acroterion (talk) 20:27, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

• I am disabling your unblock request, as the block has expired. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 21:42, 25 February 2018 (UTC)