User talk:Maruru~enwiki

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Maruru. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Maruru~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

01:40, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed

This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: Special:GlobalRenameRequest. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

16:01, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Vani Hari

Sorry, but you are incorrect. Read through WP:LEAD - "The lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important aspects". Hari has been criticized by scientists for her psuedu-scientific views and we've got an entire section that represents a decent portion of the article. WP:NPOV requires that we cover it and mention it, not hide it as you edit is doing. Please undo your edit and discuss this on the article talk page. I'm not going to bother to revert you again as I strongly suspect you'll just revert over and over. That's getting into an WP:EDITWAR and not helpful. The general approach on Wikipedia is WP:BRD - Boldly make a change, but if it gets Reverted, start a Discussion on the talk page. It not revert to your preference over and over. You can also see the previous discussions on the talk page.

Also, please only use the Minor checkbox for truly minor edits, such as correcting a spelling error. Removing something from the lead is not a minor edit. Thanks, Ravensfire (talk) 18:52, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit conflict)Welcome to Wikipedia. I've reverted some of your edits to Vani Hari. You removed some sourced information while changing the Facebook stats. Since your edit summary only referred to the stats, it almost appears to be an error on your part.

As for the information in the lede, this appears to summarize the article and sources properly. She's received a huge amount of criticism, and it's been discussed at great length on the article talk page. Please join the discussions on the article talk page. --Ronz (talk) 19:04, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, i wanted to thank you for your edits though they've been reverted. That topic is captured by a bunch of people on a side who want to demonize Vani Hari, and i'm topic banned after a long and stupid case. SageRad (talk) 12:41, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy notice

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Vani Hari. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
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 engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. [1] [2] [3] --Ronz (talk) 18:00, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Continued editwarring

I didn't realize that you'd continued edit-warring: [4] [5] [6]. Please try to work with other editors per through Wikipedia's dispute resolution processes, rather than making further such edits to the article. --Ronz (talk) 16:21, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion of your editing

While I appreciate your finally joining the discussions, you need to stop edit warring. Discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Maruru.7Eenwiki_reported_by_User:Ronz_.28Result:_.29 --Ronz (talk) 22:00, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Drmies (talk) 23:09, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]