`  :::: In response to reviewing the full incident. Re-directs are normally created without consensus, though anyone who things one is inappropriate can take it to WP:RFD. While it would have been better for HTML2011 to not re-insert the content after it had been removed once, and just gone to the talk page in line with the WP:BRD cycle, he did raise the issue on the talk page within about ten minutes of re-inserting the links. You did respond to his comments, but should have just left it at that for the moment, with the second revert beginning to cross the line into edit warring. Not to mention, the use of anti-vandalism tools resulted in a blanket revert of changes including some which appear to be unrelated to the content dispute.   :::: The warning issued to HTML2011's talk page was not necessary, and ``Welcome to Wikipedia`` messages are not appropriate for someone who has been on Wikipedia for three months. If a note needed to be left, then it should have been personalized and explained exactly what part of the WP:MOS HTML2011 was going against. The further templated messages were also not appropriate, as HTML2011 was not a vandal, and they would only serve to escalate things, not resolve the dispute. Wikipedia:Removing warnings is outdated and is from the time in which removing warnings left on talk pages was prohibited. However, policy on the issue changed several years ago and can now be found at WP:BLANKING - in short, editors are allowed to remove content from their user talk page, but archiving is preferred.  ·  `