User talk:Jane his wife

Welcome[edit]

Welcome!

Hello, Jane his wife, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! GcSwRhIc (talk) 20:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nicole Kidman[edit]

I understand you are a newcomer to Wikipedia and may not understand all the policies and guidelines as linked to in the above welcome note. Your actions at Nicole Kidman, which largely consist of reverting other editors, making snide comments in your edit summaries, and which overall smacks of a WP:OWN violation is not in keeping with the collegial, collaborative way we work on Wikipedia. Several editors, particularly over the last two days, have reverted some of your edits, many of which read as if your the actress' publicist and thus violate WP:TONE. When multiple editors are reverting you, that should be an indication that perhaps your edits are not those of the consensus. I am going to the article and reverting it to one of the other editors' versions. I advise you not to continue your incipient edit war, and to get into the habit of discussing things on the talk page. Otherwise, it may be necessary to call in an admin, in order to prevent blind reversions and edit warring. --Tenebrae (talk) 02:46, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Nicole Kidman. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
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; 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 continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Drmies (talk) 03:13, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reap what you sow[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 03:18, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A WP:3RR vio has been filed against Jane his wife at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. --Tenebrae (talk) 06:12, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 2011[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring, as you did at Nicole Kidman. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. T. Canens (talk) 11:14, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Request please[edit]

Hi, you say that this is not your first account to the project. Would you please kindly disclose your previous account? It would be appreciated if you did, thanks in advance, --CrohnieGal^Talk 12:11, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock}}

{{unblock}},

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).

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

Request reason:

Oh and to that Reap what you sow comment. You can go ahead and make a discussion about me, take time out of your lonely life to seek out and block me, report me, whine about me, but it's really just flattering me that you'd do all this. I love haters and they always come back. Like you. :)

Decline reason:

Confirmed by CheckUser as a sock puppet of a blocked user. Talk page editing privileges revoked due to abuse of the talk page, as shown above. –MuZemike 22:48, 29 March 2011 (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.