User talk:WikiNuevo

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you 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. Eyesnore 02:24, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule at La Luz del Mundo. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. —Darkwind (talk) 02:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

falsely accused of vandalism and editing disruption

User AjaxFiore is just altering and removing information because he wants to, by abusing his wikipedia skills he is falsely accusing me of vandalism,

greetings, Rahul Contreras --WikiNuevo (talk) 03:06, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm assuming you're new around here and I wanted to welcome you to Wikipedia. I don't think that the manner in which Ajaxfiore threatened you and harassed you was fair. It sounds to me like your edits made him feel uncomfortable, and thus responded to your contributions in such a threatening and indecorous manner. I appreciate that you started a discussion in the talk page, and encourage you to continue to do so (if it makes things easier, you can post your message in your native language if you feel that your message in english reads less clearly, but that's totally up to you). For now, I will clean up your page since I feel his threats were an over-reaction. In the spirit of constructive editing, I hope you find this message less threatening and more welcoming than Ajaxfiore's pseudo-wikipedian threats. I encourage you to keep cool and offer your best insight in the discussion page. Have a wonderful day, RidjalA (talk) 05:20, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The discussion is about the topic La Luz del Mundo.

Guide for participants If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the "Request dispute resolution" button below this guide or go to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/request for an easy to follow, step by step request form. What this noticeboard is: It is an early step to resolve content disputes after talk page discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction. What this noticeboard is not: It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about article content, not disputes about user conduct. It is not a place to discuss disputes that are already under discussion at other dispute resolution forums. It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN. It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy. Things to remember: Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, and objective. Comment only about the article's content, not the other editors. Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion. Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{subst:drn-notice}} on their user talk page. Sign and date your posts with four tildes "~~~~". If you ever need any help, ask one of our volunteers, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located here and on the DR/N talkpage. Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you!CarrieVS (talk) 18:03, 5 February 2013 (UTC) Hello, from a DR/N volunteer This is a friendly reminder to involved parties that there is a current Dispute Resolution Noticeboard case still awaiting comments and replies. If this dispute has not been resolved to the satisfaction of the filing editor and all involved parties and no further comment is made at the opened filing, it may be failed and suggested that the next logical course of action be formal mediation. Please take a moment to add a note about this at the discussion so that a volunteer may close the case as "Failed". If the dispute is still ongoing, please add your input. UseTheCommandLine (talk) 20:20, 15 February 2013 (UTC)