Some recent editions by IPs have tried to remove all criticism of Neurobics from this article. We might need to semi-protect it temporarily to avoid those disruptions.--Gorpik (talk) 10:30, 30 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
- It would probably take a higher level of disruption to justify that. Looie496 (talk) 14:35, 30 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
- The reversions continue. It is fine to add references to works supporting Neurobics, but not to remove all references to criticism, as the IPs do. By the way, these are the only contributions from those IPs; it looks like some proponent or proponents or Neurobics are manipulating this article.--Gorpik (talk) 09:21, 31 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
- I agree that your version is better, and have returned to it. Looie496 (talk) 13:48, 31 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
- I have requested semi-protection. There has been no attempt by the IPs to discuss. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:48, 31 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
- Unregistered editors: You need to discuss your proposed edits on the talk page, not just make them, and not just use edit summaries. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:48, 31 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
- If conflict persists after semi-protection expires, see the dispute resolution policy and try one of the procedures listed there. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:48, 31 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
