Talk:Global Liveability Ranking
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Edit warring (User:M.Bitton) edit
M.Bitton, stop edit warring by reverting my edits without a reason, you have already been blocked for many times for violating 3RR (your block log). Meanwhile, I urge you stop edit warring and to seek consensus, and please stop deleting useful information that can help people. I already warned you in your talk page but you also reverted my warning to you!--105.67.5.65 (talk) 16:23, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- User:M.Bitton refactored my attempt to resolve the situation here. While I'm aware of WP:ONUS, they didn't provide a reason why my edits should not inculded in the article as everybody knows that the article tries to provide some of the key findings in EIU's liveability report such as ten most and least liviable cities.--105.67.5.65 (talk) 16:57, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- They doesn't seem interested in seeking consensus because they didn't answer my attempt to resolve the dispute, and they said that I'm not wellcomed on their talk page after reverting my warning.--105.67.5.65 (talk) 16:59, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- User:M.Bitton refactored my attempt to resolve the situation here. While I'm aware of WP:ONUS, they didn't provide a reason why my edits should not inculded in the article as everybody knows that the article tries to provide some of the key findings in EIU's liveability report such as ten most and least liviable cities.--105.67.5.65 (talk) 16:57, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
untitled edit
Whitesnowland (talk) 04:36, 14 August 2018 (UTC) In the 2018 edition, Tokyo and Toronto tied as 7th in the ranking, which cannot be reflected using the mark# when editing(I haven't checked whether there are actually ties as well in previous editions). Do any editors know how to present this kind of numbered lists? I created actually 3 lists as components to form the whole list - 1st to 7th, the tied 7th, and 9th to 10th. I guess there should be a smarter way.
105.67.5.65 edit
Special:Contributions/105.67.5.65, whose edit history speaks for itself is trying to include some content despite being reverted. If anyone else agrees with them, then I'll have no problem with that, but in the meantime I urge them to stop edit warring and to seek consensus for such a change. M.Bitton (talk) 15:52, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- Since the IP has deleted the warning on their talk page, left one on mine and even refactored my comment, I take that as a proof that they are now aware of what consensus means and the fact that the WP:ONUS to achieve one is entirely on them. M.Bitton (talk) 16:39, 14 June 2021 (UTC)