User talk:Mrm7171

May 2013

We don't need to have an edit war. We can discuss changes before making them in such a wholesale manner as you did on May 12, 2013.Iss246 (talk) 03:43, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

You asked me to discuss the edits with you in your comment on May 13, 2013. I am writing here to discuss edits with you.Iss246 (talk) 13:17, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Let's talk here, and not have an edit war. I am at the Work, Stress, and Health conference in L.A. right now. I am writing to you from my hotel room. I have been talking to some OHP specialists who happen to have come from I/O (other OHP people come from other disciplines) in order to get your perspective. What they have told me is that I/O psychologists have been largely interested in topics such as selection, job analysis, performance appraisal, motivation, compensation, etc. Worker health did not hold that much of a priority. You can look at old SIOP conference programs. That people in I/O have more recently become interested in worker health is the result of the growth of OHP.

I appreciate it that you may be a student studying I/O and that you are committed to the discipline. Maybe even one of your i/o professors does health research. That is fine. You have to appreciate that OHP has come into its own. It even covers different territory that health psychology covers.Iss246 (talk) 05:33, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I am back from the conference. Let's use this page to talk.Iss246 (talk) 05:55, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Let's avoid an edit war. I invite you to talk about changes. We could use this page.Iss246 (talk) 15:26, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Mrm7171. It looks like you and Iss246 are having some difficulties. Do you know how to use talk pages to discuss conflicts? All you need to do on this page is to click one of the [Edit] buttons towards the top of this page, and type your comment at the end. Then sign your comment by typing ~~~~ at the end of your comment. The Mediawiki software will automagically turn those four tildes into your account name and the date when you click the "Save page" button (towards the bottom, just like on article pages). Then wait for a while until Iss246 notices your explanation.

It would be very helpful if you would click the edit button and explain what changes you believe should be made to these pages, and why. People at the English Wikipedia are very big on WP:Reliable sources like university-level textbooks, so if you have a good book or a journal article that supports your views, then feel free to tell us what that is. Psychology-related articles tend to have a lot of room for improvement, so it would be good to hear from you about ways to improve them. Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:21, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Psychology sidebar

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Template:Psychology sidebar. 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, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. 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. Frietjes (talk) 14:32, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring

Your recent editing history at Applied psychology 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. - DVdm (talk) 14:39, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

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. Thank you. - DVdm (talk) 14:50, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring

Hi Mrm7171. Your edit warring and refusal to engage in discussion with other users at applied psychology has become disruptive. I have full protected the page for 2 days to prevent this disruption; if you continue edit warring behaviour (even if you don't technically break the three-revert rule) once the article is unprotected you may be blocked from editing. Take this as a final warning. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 16:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Changes you made on May 23, 2013 in the OHP section

On 22:49 You wrote, "PLEASE DISCUSS WITH ME CHANGES BEFORE DELETING EVERYONE ELSES EDITS ISS246. YOU HAVE A HISTORY OF IT. WILL REPORT YOU TOO!" That is why I am here writing to you. I want to discuss changes. You have not stopped here to discuss the changes. We should discuss the changes. I have been writing to you for 10 days now, since May 13. Iss246 (talk) 23:38, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 for edit warring, refusal to engage in discussion, and general disruptive behaviour. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 10:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Mrm7171 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Im a new user. Not at all sure how to talk on talk page?? Have been blocked due to not talking...how is this done then please. Has the one other person iss246 who constantly would undo my revisions been blocked too please? If not, seems grossly unfair! Am more than happy to comply with Wikipideia rules but surely other users more experienced cant use thjeir knowledge of the system to block new users who are unclear about the rules. Thanks. look forward to hearing back soon.

Decline reason:

It's great to see that you've finally figured out how to use a talk page. I can see above that there were several attempts to guide you here, and many warnings that your behavior is unacceptable. Instead of focusing on the actions of others, the best path to having your editing abilities restored is to indicate you understand our policy on edit warring, and that you will refrain from further article edits until your content disputes are resolved through discussion. Kuru (talk) 13:34, 25 May 2013 (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.

[[Category:{{unblock| Thats cool. I'm still very unclear abvout talk page and feel administrator may have acted a liottle demeaning. Not sure if new users have difficulty that experienced users should act sartcastically or bullying toieard new experienced userts like myself? I gfeel pretty bullied. Sorry but just a new inexperioenced user. ]] [[Category:[[Category:{{unblock| Thats okay will cop it. and wait fdor the 48 hourts. Feel pretty bullied and didn't need sarcasm or demeaning me by experienced wikipedia user. Could hjabe treated he with more respect. I'm just not sure how it all works yet. Wonderion g why kuru was so demeaning, demoralising of new user inexperien ced like myself. Didnbt need to be put down or fdinger in my chest so much kuyru, just a new user. inexperienced could have been a little more cool about it all though kuriu, instead of tryting tgo put me down so basdly and disreszpect me so badly.....]]