User talk:J05HYYY

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, J05HYYY, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Cannabis (drug). I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! A8 UDI 21:39, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:FormalScienceAppliedScience.xcf

Thanks for uploading File:FormalScienceAppliedScience.xcf. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 03:59, 7 December 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 03:59, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Summaries

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also useful when reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. :) A8 UDI 02:55, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:FormalScienceAppliedScience.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:FormalScienceAppliedScience.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Skier Dude (talk) 08:30, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

June 2014

Your recent editing history at Firefox shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Codename Lisa (talk) 19:44, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was just coming to state the same. Please the BRD cycle. Please discuss until consensus is reached. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:46, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, you have brought it up at DRN. You have two editors who have stated it doesn't belong. Grow up. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:53, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DRN

Hi, I'm a regular volunteer at the Dispute resolution noticeboard. The request that you made there has been removed because it was not made via our listing script. Please click the "Request Dispute Resolution" button or link at the top of the DRN page and make your request using the form which pops up. That will put the request in proper form and automatically notify the other participants in the dispute. Filing manually puts too much of a burden on our volunteers to put your request into proper form and notify the other participants. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 13:39, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:J05HYYY reported by User:Walter Görlitz (Result: ). Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:21, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

June 2014

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Firefox. 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. Bbb23 (talk) 02:05, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This 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).

J05HYYY (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Problem got resolved, and I was blocked afterwards, block wasn't needed in the first place. (See last few comments of http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Talk:Firefox#Safe_Browsing_API)

Decline reason:

I don't know what you mean by "Problem got resolved", but looking at the discussion that you linked to, what I see is you stubbornly holding out against consensus right down to your last post there, and making absurd accusations against those who presume to disagree with you. Nowhere do I see anything that suggests that you are unlikely to continue in the same disruptive way if unblocked. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:08, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

You have a higher chance of getting unblocked if you said "I am sorry, I apologize", instead of straw man and deceptive comments like this. FYI, you are blocked for violating 3RR; it has nothing to do with a problem being solved or not. Also see Wikipedia:Silence and consensus#What does not constitute silence. Problem is not solved; whether you'd like to see it that way only gets you blocked more often. 188.245.72.113 (talk) 07:55, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]