98.173.248.2 (talk) corrected statement that wasn't completely accurate |
98.173.248.2 (talk) |
||
Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
Hi there. Given that your edits keep getting reverted, perhaps you should consider proposing them on the talk page and seeing if you can garner a consensus for them. I know it's tedious having to defend and argue just to make a minor wording change, but unfortunately that's just how it is for such controversial topics. --[[User:DrFleischman|Dr. Fleischman]] ([[User talk:DrFleischman|talk]]) 23:42, 3 July 2018 (UTC) |
Hi there. Given that your edits keep getting reverted, perhaps you should consider proposing them on the talk page and seeing if you can garner a consensus for them. I know it's tedious having to defend and argue just to make a minor wording change, but unfortunately that's just how it is for such controversial topics. --[[User:DrFleischman|Dr. Fleischman]] ([[User talk:DrFleischman|talk]]) 23:42, 3 July 2018 (UTC) |
||
::Even when I go to the talk page first and end the discussion in agreement with an admin, my edits get reverted (You know this because you've done it). --[[Special:Contributions/74.195.159.155|74.195.159.155]] ([[User talk:74.195.159.155#top|talk]]) 01:23, 4 July 2018 (UTC) |
::Even when I go to the talk page first and end the discussion in agreement with an admin, my edits get reverted (You know this because you've done it). --[[Special:Contributions/74.195.159.155|74.195.159.155]] ([[User talk:74.195.159.155#top|talk]]) 01:23, 4 July 2018 (UTC) |
||
::And I never got an adequate explanation for that. The revert doesn't make sense even if you forgot we had an agreement. You should probably include explanations when you revert good faith edits --[[Special:Contributions/98.173.248.2|98.173.248.2]] ([[User talk:98.173.248.2|talk]]) 14:56, 5 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Edit war warning == |
== Edit war warning == |
Revision as of 14:56, 5 July 2018
May 2018
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/15/Ambox_warning_pn.svg/30px-Ambox_warning_pn.svg.png)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Ben Swann. 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 that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
- 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. Favonian (talk) 16:05, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
- I understand you had good-faith WP:BLP concerns, but you still should have discussed the matter at Talk:Ben Swann. Edit summaries are not the place to engage in extended arguments. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:28, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what edits warrant discussion in Talk and which ones don't, but WP policy says explicitly to not bother with the Talk with contentious information that's not sourced sufficiently. I'm almost certain that if I went the discussion route then the misinformation would still be in the article. I took some concerns to the notice board and got no results or any discussion that took the concerns seriously.
June 2018
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.Template:Z33 --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 16:26, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
![Stop icon with clock](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/39/Stop_x_nuvola_with_clock.svg/40px-Stop_x_nuvola_with_clock.svg.png)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Drmies (talk) 17:57, 26 June 2018 (UTC)- If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.
July 2018
Hi there. Given that your edits keep getting reverted, perhaps you should consider proposing them on the talk page and seeing if you can garner a consensus for them. I know it's tedious having to defend and argue just to make a minor wording change, but unfortunately that's just how it is for such controversial topics. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 23:42, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
- Even when I go to the talk page first and end the discussion in agreement with an admin, my edits get reverted (You know this because you've done it). --74.195.159.155 (talk) 01:23, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
- And I never got an adequate explanation for that. The revert doesn't make sense even if you forgot we had an agreement. You should probably include explanations when you revert good faith edits --98.173.248.2 (talk) 14:56, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
Edit war warning
![Stop icon](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f1/Stop_hand_nuvola.svg/30px-Stop_hand_nuvola.svg.png)
Your recent editing history at Ben Swann shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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. See BRD for 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 your 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. Jytdog (talk) 00:53, 4 July 2018 (UTC)