Interested3

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Interested3, 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
• How to write a great article
• 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! Oo7565 (talk) 07:26, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Help Request

{{helpme}}can you monitor my discussion on the "morgellons" article website plz? it is controversial subject and I would like to contribute my opinion supported by verifiable sources to the conspiracy section of that article. there is a troll that does not like changes. Thanks for your helpInterested3 (talk) 08:18, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

In simple, short terms: Stick to discussing the issue, not the person - even if the other party does not. Use policy-based arguments, and give references. Stay calm; relax, remember that the idea is to try and come to an agreement. There is no deadline, doesn't matter if it takes a while; Wikipedia will be around for a long time. If the other user edits the document and adds or reverts things, then let them. Ask them to please not do, but if they do, don't join in. Just keep discussing, and wait. If you can't reach an agreement, ask for a third opinion.

If things do get nasty, then we can take steps to warn, and ultimately block, the other user - but this is a separate issue.

Please read WP:DISPUTE.

See how you go, and if you have any specific problem - like an nasty comment - let me know on my talk page, or use another helpme.

If there is something screamingly urgent and totally against policy, go to WP:ANI.

As my favorite essay says, we like arguments; we have them stuffed :-) See WP:TIGER

thanks, im the ruff guy too. Interested3 (talk) 10:32, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Cheers,  Chzz  ►  08:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

{{helpme}}plz look at my additions to the "morgellons" article. they are very researched and well referenced, and up to date !. they are being undone by trolls. Guess we need some arbirtration of some sort. Thanks :)

• The user Verbal requests that you establish consensus on the Morgellons talk page. Propose your alterations there, and establish a consensus before editing the page again. Also, you should read WP:Assume good faith, it is a behavioral guideline we uphold. –Meiskam (talk•contrib•block) 08:56, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

May 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Morgellons. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page 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. Verbal chat 10:22, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

{{helpme}} on this plz

Read my contributions plz Interested3 (talk) 10:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Interested3. Please could you say exactly what help you need?—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 11:42, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/98.194.123.23 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Verbal chat 09:44, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

look at the facts plsInterested3 (talk) 10:02, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

plz jump in on these fools, sock it to em!!

{{helpme}}I have added a good paragraph to the "morgellons" article and there is a troll there that has a very limited POV and is removing my contribs. no one is editing the other contribs. My contributions are more current and more logical than the entire article. Plz review and let me know. Interested3 (talk) 19:56, 31 May 2009 (UTC) Thanks

When editing, please remember: Revert wars are considered harmful. -- Patchy1^(talk) 21:53, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

You have been blocked because checkuser evidence confirmed that you used multiple accounts to sway consensus, which violates our sockpuppetry policy. If you want to appeal against your block, you should carefully read Wikipedia:Appealing a block and follow the instructions. You weren't blocked because of the logic of your article contributions, but because you violated policy to make it look as though your edits had lots of support. There is no chance you will be unblocked unless you directly address the reason for the block. What you would do differently if you were unblocked. I hope this helps. – Toon^(talk) 22:08, 31 May 2009 (UTC)