You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
HD DVD. Note that the
three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the
three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be
blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a
consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue
dispute resolution. —
Locke Cole •
t •
c
08:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Proctor spock ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Improper block. Another editor, Locke Cole, removed valuable content from the HD DVD article. I saw his inappropriate removal, created an account, and restored the material. He placed the boilerplate warning message above and proceeded to remove the content again. The consensus on the discussion page for HD DVD is that this content belongs in the article. I have restored the content and no other editor has removed it since. However, Locke Cole requested a checkuser on me. I am not sure why it was granted, but I am not another editor to the HD DVD or similar articles. Locke Cole appears to be gaming the system to prevent other editors who happen to share the same opinion from editing these articles.
Decline reason:
You have not been blocked directly. If you have been autoblocked, we need to know the autoblock ID, the user who is causing your block, and your IP address. — B ( talk) 20:48, 6 January 2008 (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.
This is confusing. The block is a result of this: Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Ray_andrew. Alison appears to be causing the block at Locke Cole's request. Proctor spock ( talk) 20:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I have not personally attacked you. Again: the checkuser request resulted in a "likely" response that you and Ray are the same editor. — Locke Cole • t • c 02:48, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for coming to visit me on my user page. In response to your hurt feelings, I'll tell you what I really think. I really think that you (Ray Andrew, aka Proctor Spock, aka, some number of other sock puppets) are a PR guy for HD DVD. I figure that with so much money at stake, both Blu-Ray and HD DVD must have people editing wikipedia, and you definitely defend the latter format like it's your full time job. You have no other wikipedia edits whatsoever. I guess I should be jealous, since you get paid to edit wikipedia, while I do it for free! Pisomojado ( talk) 19:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Ray andrew for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. — Locke Cole • t • c 03:14, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Do not wikistalk me, doing so is considered harassment and can lead to a block. I am specifically referring to this edit: [1]. — Locke Cole • t • c 23:43, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
You posted "I object to using stripes of blue for Warner Bros since they should not be colored blue until the day they become Blu-ray exclusive, on June 1st, 2008". Although I have been fighting for this chart, I have to say that the colour blue has every right to be in the warner slice as the colour red does because Warner have been releasing on BOTH formats before the CES announcement. Because Warner have always been releasing on both formats it would makes sense that the chart be both red and blue, or a different colour altogether. I just wanted to say that on your talk page instead of pointing it out on the articles talk page. JayKeaton ( talk) 06:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Hope you haven't been discouraged by the rude welcome you got over the last few weeks. I hope you continue to contribute. -- Ray andrew ( talk) 00:39, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
HD DVD. Note that the
three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the
three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be
blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a
consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue
dispute resolution. —
Locke Cole •
t •
c
08:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Proctor spock ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Improper block. Another editor, Locke Cole, removed valuable content from the HD DVD article. I saw his inappropriate removal, created an account, and restored the material. He placed the boilerplate warning message above and proceeded to remove the content again. The consensus on the discussion page for HD DVD is that this content belongs in the article. I have restored the content and no other editor has removed it since. However, Locke Cole requested a checkuser on me. I am not sure why it was granted, but I am not another editor to the HD DVD or similar articles. Locke Cole appears to be gaming the system to prevent other editors who happen to share the same opinion from editing these articles.
Decline reason:
You have not been blocked directly. If you have been autoblocked, we need to know the autoblock ID, the user who is causing your block, and your IP address. — B ( talk) 20:48, 6 January 2008 (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.
This is confusing. The block is a result of this: Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Ray_andrew. Alison appears to be causing the block at Locke Cole's request. Proctor spock ( talk) 20:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I have not personally attacked you. Again: the checkuser request resulted in a "likely" response that you and Ray are the same editor. — Locke Cole • t • c 02:48, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for coming to visit me on my user page. In response to your hurt feelings, I'll tell you what I really think. I really think that you (Ray Andrew, aka Proctor Spock, aka, some number of other sock puppets) are a PR guy for HD DVD. I figure that with so much money at stake, both Blu-Ray and HD DVD must have people editing wikipedia, and you definitely defend the latter format like it's your full time job. You have no other wikipedia edits whatsoever. I guess I should be jealous, since you get paid to edit wikipedia, while I do it for free! Pisomojado ( talk) 19:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Ray andrew for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. — Locke Cole • t • c 03:14, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Do not wikistalk me, doing so is considered harassment and can lead to a block. I am specifically referring to this edit: [1]. — Locke Cole • t • c 23:43, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
You posted "I object to using stripes of blue for Warner Bros since they should not be colored blue until the day they become Blu-ray exclusive, on June 1st, 2008". Although I have been fighting for this chart, I have to say that the colour blue has every right to be in the warner slice as the colour red does because Warner have been releasing on BOTH formats before the CES announcement. Because Warner have always been releasing on both formats it would makes sense that the chart be both red and blue, or a different colour altogether. I just wanted to say that on your talk page instead of pointing it out on the articles talk page. JayKeaton ( talk) 06:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Hope you haven't been discouraged by the rude welcome you got over the last few weeks. I hope you continue to contribute. -- Ray andrew ( talk) 00:39, 22 January 2008 (UTC)