User talk:Neuroresearch

May 2014

Your recent editing history at Autism Research Institute shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
In addition to not waiting until consensus was reached. You removed appropriate medref tags and placed false titles on references. You have raised the issue at the dispute resolution notice board, but not waited for any resolutions. The edits I made fixed the broken links, gave archives and used the actual titles from the references. You have not only violated the 3RR rule but made very unconstructive edits. See the talk page of the article. MrBill3 (talk) 07:51, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Autism Research Institute has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Misleading edit summaries violate policy. MrBill3 (talk) 07:54, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Neuroresearch reported by User:MrBill3 (Result: ). Thank you. MrBill3 (talk) 08:29, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neuroresearch, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Neuroresearch! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Technical 13 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:08, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

You are engaged in tendentious editing advancing a fringe point of view. This is unacceptable per Wikipedia policies. As an editor with no other interests on Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further warning if this continues. Guy (Help!) 16:51, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of Difulton (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.