User talk:70.179.154.161

There are officially 12 episodes of Terra Nova. The first episode was 2 hours. The final two episodes aired on the same date back to back but were separate episodes. Amazon.com, itunes, the Library of Congress lists them this way. Other articles on Wikipedia shows with double-length episodes list hour long episodes as one episode (i.e., Seinfeld).

Not only are you reverting against consensus, you have also broken several Wikipedia policies such as WP:EDITWAR and WP:3RR. If you continue to revert editors and not engage in the discussion, that will constitute disruptive editing and you might be blocked. Wikipedia is a community based encyclopedia, editors work together by creating and adhering to a consensus, which you are refusing to do. Revert again and you will be reported to the administrators. Use the talk page. Here is the link. -- SchrutedIt08 (talk) 23:39, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Actually, there is no valid consensus that the episodes should be listed as 13, based on the comments made at the RfC. --AussieLegend (✉) 03:12, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:06, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Terra Nova

Although you've raised some valid points, and I do tend to agree with you, edit-warring over the number of episodes isn't going to achieve anything. You may even end up being blocked for edit-warring. You really need to keep discussing this at the Terra Nova talk page. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:05, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I posted a lot on the discussion page. I also posted sources for the revisions. No one except you has responded for 3 days (except to revert). 70.179.154.161 (talk) 22:03, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Just to give you a heads up, I plan on filing a report at WP:ANI over your determination to ignore WP:BRD countless times. You have been reverted by no less than three seperate editors and you have been editing warring over content that you have no consensus to change. It matters very little that you think that you are right. What matters is that have been edit warring. I will file it when I get home in the next hour. The most likely result will be that your IP address will be blocked for edit warring. Then the article will be edited to retain the pre dispute version. If you decide to self revert on both articles I will not make the report and your ip will stay unblocked. Either way, the article will retain the original consensus version. I even Aussielegend warned you about reverting on the article and he agrees with you. JOJ ^Hutton 22:35, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Notice of ANI discussion

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#IP anon editor failing to stop making changes on an article, despite being reverted by several editors--JOJ ^Hutton 00:44, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. 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 the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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.  Drmies (talk) 01:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

• Predictably blocked. When this is over, if you wish to make your point, you can do so on the article talk page, with evidence and all that. If you simply revert again, you will simply be blocked again. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 01:20, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

Jojhutton is trying to intimidate me to stop editing. He's sent me a few messages implying that I will be banned, I had better revert my edits, etc. He claims there is a consensus and I am going against it... There is none as pointed out by other users in the discussion. But he knows I don't edit often since I don't have a user name here, so I will probably back down. I posted discussion with new sources that corrected old sources. I waited for follow up discussion. Instead of contributing any discussion, Jojhutton just reverted the edits. He apparently thinks its okay for him to revert, but not others, I guess maybe because he's been editing the page a long time. He is reverting everything I do. I posted an updated source. He just blanket reverted everything I did instead of checking if anything I changed was okay. He seems to think it's his page. According to the Wikipedia help page, anyone is welcome to edit.

I read Wikipedia a lot and I like the information to be correct. This whole dispute is because I made a change to the number of episodes from 13 to the official 12... Itunes, amazon.com list this show as having 12 episodes. Fox lists it as having 12 episodes. It aired that way. I would appreciate anyone reading this to see these sources. A lot of low-traffic pages such as this don't get a lot of editors watching it or contributing - it looks like there are only 3 or 4 people active. If we just had a few people to help edit, we stop 2 or 3 people writing whatever they want. It seems absurd that the official information doesn't appear on the Wikipedia page, but as long as there are a majority of interested people that don't want it that way, there's nothing we can do. It's very easy to edit Wikipedia. You don't have to sign in or anything like that. Please help us. Thank you.

I wrote most of this in response and was banned before being able to post it. Now that I have been banned, he finally posted up follow up discussion. He now knows I can't respond so he waited. I did everything right. I posted discussion like I was supposed to. I waited 3 days for responses. I reverted people's revisions several times, but only because they didn't respond in disucssion. That's the way it's supposed to be done. The person who banned me says I need to post sources. I was the only one to posted sources. I posted the link to the US amazon showing the correct 12 episodes. Previously it was to the UK site which showed the syndicated 13 episodes. The person who banned me just gave me a rude reply without even looking at what happened. The most irritating thing about this is I spent time looking up information so that the article would be correct and those 2 or 3 guys just reverted because they didn't like me messing with their page.

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Jojhutton is trying to intimidate me to stop editing. He's sent me a few messages implying that I will be banned, I had better revert my edits, etc. He claims there is a consensus and I am going against it... There is none as pointed out by other users in the discussion. But he knows I don't edit often since I don't have a user name here, so I will probably back down. I posted discussion with new sources that corrected old sources. I waited for follow up discussion. Instead of contributing any discussion, Jojhutton just reverted the edits. He apparently thinks its okay for him to revert, but not others, I guess maybe because he's been editing the page a long time. He is reverting everything I do. I posted an updated source. He just blanket reverted everything I did instead of checking if anything I changed was okay. He seems to think it's his page. According to the Wikipedia help page, anyone is welcome to edit. I read Wikipedia a lot and I like the information to be correct. This whole dispute is because I made a change to the number of episodes from 13 to the official 12... Itunes, amazon.com list this show as having 12 episodes. Fox lists it as having 12 episodes. It aired that way. I would appreciate anyone reading this to see these sources. A lot of low-traffic pages such as this don't get a lot of editors watching it or contributing - it looks like there are only 3 or 4 people active. If we just had a few people to help edit, we stop 2 or 3 people writing whatever they want. It seems absurd that the official information doesn't appear on the Wikipedia page, but as long as there are a majority of interested people that don't want it that way, there's nothing we can do. It's very easy to edit Wikipedia. You don't have to sign in or anything like that. Please help us. Thank you. I wrote most of this in response and was banned before being able to post it. Now that I have been banned, he finally posted up follow up discussion. He now knows I can't respond so he waited. I did everything right. I posted discussion like I was supposed to. I waited 3 days for responses. I reverted people's revisions several times, but only because they didn't respond in disucssion. That's the way it's supposed to be done. The person who banned me says I need to post sources. I was the only one to posted sources. I posted the link to the US amazon showing the correct 12 episodes. Previously it was to the UK site which showed the syndicated 13 episodes. The person who banned me just gave me a rude reply without even looking at what happened. The most irritating thing about this is I spent time looking up information so that the article would be correct and those 2 or 3 guys just reverted because they didn't like me messing with their page. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Jojhutton is trying to intimidate me to stop editing. He's sent me a few messages implying that I will be banned, I had better revert my edits, etc. He claims there is a consensus and I am going against it... There is none as pointed out by other users in the discussion. But he knows I don't edit often since I don't have a user name here, so I will probably back down. I posted discussion with new sources that corrected old sources. I waited for follow up discussion. Instead of contributing any discussion, Jojhutton just reverted the edits. He apparently thinks its okay for him to revert, but not others, I guess maybe because he's been editing the page a long time. He is reverting everything I do. I posted an updated source. He just blanket reverted everything I did instead of checking if anything I changed was okay. He seems to think it's his page. According to the Wikipedia help page, anyone is welcome to edit. I read Wikipedia a lot and I like the information to be correct. This whole dispute is because I made a change to the number of episodes from 13 to the official 12... Itunes, amazon.com list this show as having 12 episodes. Fox lists it as having 12 episodes. It aired that way. I would appreciate anyone reading this to see these sources. A lot of low-traffic pages such as this don't get a lot of editors watching it or contributing - it looks like there are only 3 or 4 people active. If we just had a few people to help edit, we stop 2 or 3 people writing whatever they want. It seems absurd that the official information doesn't appear on the Wikipedia page, but as long as there are a majority of interested people that don't want it that way, there's nothing we can do. It's very easy to edit Wikipedia. You don't have to sign in or anything like that. Please help us. Thank you. I wrote most of this in response and was banned before being able to post it. Now that I have been banned, he finally posted up follow up discussion. He now knows I can't respond so he waited. I did everything right. I posted discussion like I was supposed to. I waited 3 days for responses. I reverted people's revisions several times, but only because they didn't respond in disucssion. That's the way it's supposed to be done. The person who banned me says I need to post sources. I was the only one to posted sources. I posted the link to the US amazon showing the correct 12 episodes. Previously it was to the UK site which showed the syndicated 13 episodes. The person who banned me just gave me a rude reply without even looking at what happened. The most irritating thing about this is I spent time looking up information so that the article would be correct and those 2 or 3 guys just reverted because they didn't like me messing with their page. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Jojhutton is trying to intimidate me to stop editing. He's sent me a few messages implying that I will be banned, I had better revert my edits, etc. He claims there is a consensus and I am going against it... There is none as pointed out by other users in the discussion. But he knows I don't edit often since I don't have a user name here, so I will probably back down. I posted discussion with new sources that corrected old sources. I waited for follow up discussion. Instead of contributing any discussion, Jojhutton just reverted the edits. He apparently thinks its okay for him to revert, but not others, I guess maybe because he's been editing the page a long time. He is reverting everything I do. I posted an updated source. He just blanket reverted everything I did instead of checking if anything I changed was okay. He seems to think it's his page. According to the Wikipedia help page, anyone is welcome to edit. I read Wikipedia a lot and I like the information to be correct. This whole dispute is because I made a change to the number of episodes from 13 to the official 12... Itunes, amazon.com list this show as having 12 episodes. Fox lists it as having 12 episodes. It aired that way. I would appreciate anyone reading this to see these sources. A lot of low-traffic pages such as this don't get a lot of editors watching it or contributing - it looks like there are only 3 or 4 people active. If we just had a few people to help edit, we stop 2 or 3 people writing whatever they want. It seems absurd that the official information doesn't appear on the Wikipedia page, but as long as there are a majority of interested people that don't want it that way, there's nothing we can do. It's very easy to edit Wikipedia. You don't have to sign in or anything like that. Please help us. Thank you. I wrote most of this in response and was banned before being able to post it. Now that I have been banned, he finally posted up follow up discussion. He now knows I can't respond so he waited. I did everything right. I posted discussion like I was supposed to. I waited 3 days for responses. I reverted people's revisions several times, but only because they didn't respond in disucssion. That's the way it's supposed to be done. The person who banned me says I need to post sources. I was the only one to posted sources. I posted the link to the US amazon showing the correct 12 episodes. Previously it was to the UK site which showed the syndicated 13 episodes. The person who banned me just gave me a rude reply without even looking at what happened. The most irritating thing about this is I spent time looking up information so that the article would be correct and those 2 or 3 guys just reverted because they didn't like me messing with their page. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}