User talk:Master106/Archive 1

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Sergecross73 in topic May 2022

Important Notice edit

This 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 post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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.

Doug Weller talk 09:02, 19 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

November 2020 edit

 

Your recent editing history at Stop the Steal 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 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. Praxidicae (talk) 18:51, 20 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

I only reverted it once.

You've engaged in a slow burning edit war over the last 48 hours. Edit warring isn't strictly limited to 24 hours, so I suggest you stop changing false to substantiated until you reach a consensus on the talk page. Praxidicae (talk) 18:53, 20 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

So changing it to that word twice is considered edit warring?

The talk page did nothing.

  Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

  1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
  2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button   located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Praxidicae (talk) 19:33, 20 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

May 2022 edit

 

Your recent editing history 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 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.

Please stop adding the timeline to the Sonic article. It's unnecessary. He's the title character. It's to be assumed he's in virtually every main title. Sergecross73 msg me 12:29, 26 May 2022 (UTC) Reply

Then why does many other series have a timeline? Look at the Super Mario series page for example. Master106 (talk) 20:10, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
On Wikipedia, we settle disputes on article talk pages, and only go through with changes if there is WP:CONSENSUS to do so. Just reverting over and over again will just get your account. So I'd start with that if you want to move forward. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 21:31, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply