Please read WP:BRD and don't edit war. Discuss on the article talk page if you disagree with a reversion. Spinning Spark 18:24, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
What you are doing is edit warring, you are not discussing, you are reverting any change that you do not agree with, and finally BRD is not a policy, but a choice, if you had actually read the page, you would see that. speednat ( talk) 18:31, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
BRD is not a valid excuse for reverting good-faith efforts to improve a page simply because you don't like the changes. Don't invoke BRD as your reason for reverting someone else's work or for edit warring: instead, provide a reason that is based on policies, guidelines, or common sense.
BRD is not an excuse to revert any change more than once. If your reversion is met with another bold effort, then you should consider not reverting, but discussing. The talk page is open to all editors, not just bold ones. The first person to start a discussion is the person who is best following BRD.
If you do not like the changes, perhaps as per your BRD page you should open the discussion. cordially speednat ( talk) 18:34, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:42, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 14:38, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
I undid your edits concerning aardvarks/ Tubulidentata being sixty million years old, as there are no unequivocal fossil aardvarks from the early Cenozoic. The oldest unequivocal aardvark fossils date from the early Miocene. I think the Encyclopedia Britannica's sentence about the order being sixty million years old may represent the authors' confusing it with Paenungulata (i.e., aardvarks plus hyraxes, proboscideans, sirenians and embrithopods).-- Mr Fink ( talk) 22:48, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 00:57, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Please read WP:BRD and don't edit war. Discuss on the article talk page if you disagree with a reversion. Spinning Spark 18:24, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
What you are doing is edit warring, you are not discussing, you are reverting any change that you do not agree with, and finally BRD is not a policy, but a choice, if you had actually read the page, you would see that. speednat ( talk) 18:31, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
BRD is not a valid excuse for reverting good-faith efforts to improve a page simply because you don't like the changes. Don't invoke BRD as your reason for reverting someone else's work or for edit warring: instead, provide a reason that is based on policies, guidelines, or common sense.
BRD is not an excuse to revert any change more than once. If your reversion is met with another bold effort, then you should consider not reverting, but discussing. The talk page is open to all editors, not just bold ones. The first person to start a discussion is the person who is best following BRD.
If you do not like the changes, perhaps as per your BRD page you should open the discussion. cordially speednat ( talk) 18:34, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:42, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 14:38, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
I undid your edits concerning aardvarks/ Tubulidentata being sixty million years old, as there are no unequivocal fossil aardvarks from the early Cenozoic. The oldest unequivocal aardvark fossils date from the early Miocene. I think the Encyclopedia Britannica's sentence about the order being sixty million years old may represent the authors' confusing it with Paenungulata (i.e., aardvarks plus hyraxes, proboscideans, sirenians and embrithopods).-- Mr Fink ( talk) 22:48, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 00:57, 25 April 2013 (UTC)