User talk:Thepersonwhochangedthisbeforelied

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Thepersonwhochangedthisbeforelied, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! —C.Fred (talk) 03:37, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Username concerns[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Thepersonwhochangedthisbeforelied", may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because it is effectively a personal attack against either the editor you reverted at Jane Jacobs or against other unnamed editors. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username, or you may simply create a new account for editing. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 03:37, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I quite agree. Please consider the advice and alternatives given by C.Fred. – S. Rich (talk) 03:41, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And your edit removed specific criticism germane to Jacobs' views and activism. "Unslumming" and gentrification are significant and interrelated issues. Acroterion (talk) 03:47, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

December 2014[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would ask that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on Jane Jacobs. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Acroterion, whose edit you undid, hadn't edited the article in the past year. Frankly, it calls into question whether you have a conflict of interest or are otherwise intentionally editing the article to move away from a neutral point of view. —C.Fred (talk) 04:05, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And The Death and Life of Great American Cities has an honored place on my bookshelf. She did great things, but her views on "unslumming" have in later days seen criticism related to what is now called gentrification. Please use the article talkpage to discuss how your condensation improves the encyclopedia article. And please assume good faith. I'm an architect with extensive experience in historic preservation and urban planning: I don't usually offer arguments from authority, but I do expect you to explain your removal. Your username as others have noted is of some concern as are your edit summaries. Acroterion (talk) 04:11, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Jane Jacobs. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, 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. 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. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block.

Please take some time to learn more about how Wikipeida works. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 04:11, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your account has been blocked indefinitely because the chosen username is a clear violation of our username policy – it is obviously profane; threatens, attacks or impersonates another person; or suggests that you do not intend to contribute positively to the encyclopedia (see our blocking and username policies for more information).

We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia, but users are not allowed to edit with inappropriate usernames and we do not tolerate 'bad faith' editing such as trolling or other disruptive behavior. If you think there are good reasons why these don't describe your account, or why you should be unblocked, you are welcome to appeal this block – read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text {{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the end of your user talk page. Mfield (Oi!) 04:48, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]