User talk:70.53.57.220

November 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:27, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Roy surname

Already cited sources with plenty of examples for article. Agricolae has not, and thus the information provided matches the same format as other surnames (ie: Smith).

This change is on Agricolae to prove, otherwise he has engaged this edit war.

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. Thank you. Agricolae (talk) 21:47, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring.

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 ~~~~}}.  —C.Fred (talk) 04:06, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I did not instigate changes originally. Agricolae has undid revisions with evidence to the contrary and has continued to edit it further even after putting claims into the administrators noticeboard. Now, I am blocked, while he continues to edit it without further investigation. When discussion got us nowhere I said wait till administrators review information. Of which, he changed it a further time. 70.53.57.220 (talk) 04:18, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You were clearly edit warring against two other editors to introduce your changes. See also WP:BRD and WP:NOTTHEM. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:17, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

---

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.

Boing! is correct that you need to focus on your conduct in your unblock request, not the conduct of other editors. That said, you are the only editor who broke the three-revert rule at Roy, which is why you're the only editor to get blocked. —C.Fred (talk) 11:55, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

---