User talk:PhilfromwaterburyWelcome!Hello, Philfromwaterbury, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! – S. Rich (talk) 18:26, 16 March 2018 (UTC) Adoption vs. ratifiedRatification is the second part of a two-step to amending the U.S. Constitution. First, an amendment must be proposed. After that, three-fourths of the States (currently 38) must ratify the amendment for it to be adopted and thereby becomes part of the Constitution. A proposed amendment may be ratified by many States, but fail to be adopted because it did not receive enough ratifications (e.g., District of Columbia Voting Rights Amendment). So the correct word in the 2A article is "adopted," because it was not just ratified by States but was ratified by enough States for it to become adopted as part of the Constitution. SMP0328. (talk) 00:35, 30 April 2019 (UTC) Hello. I was going to come here to warn you about edit warring on Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, where you have made the same edit a total of 8 times now, reverting four separate editors. However, I see that you have already acknowledged several such warnings ([1][2]) and still continued to revert, and you have not attempted to discuss your edits on the talk page. So, instead, I am blocking you from editing for 48 hours for edit warring. You can appeal this block using the information at the Guide to Appealing Blocks. Furthermore, I will be providing you with a second notice momentarily (it must be provided in a second edit for technical reasons), which you should also read. ST47 (talk) 03:22, 23 August 2019 (UTC) Alert related to Discretionary Sanctions on Gun ControlThis is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. Wikipedia and copyrightHello Philfromwaterbury! Your additions to Three Arrows have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 15:19, 19 April 2021 (UTC) ArbCom 2023 Elections voter messageHello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ArbCom 2024 Elections voter messageHello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add Three-revert ruleYour recent editing history at Cassiopeia (constellation) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Information related to User talk:Philfromwaterbury |