please do not continually revert. Discuss changes on the talk page. 76.180.115.242 ( talk) 20:18, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
stop vandalizing the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.83.53.253 ( talk) 20:23, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- I am not, and I do not appreciate being accused of it. This is still up for debate. 76.180.115.242 ( talk) 20:24, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war. Note that the
three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the
three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to
discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a
consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek
dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request
page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
76.180.115.242 (
talk) 20:33, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war. Note that the
three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the
three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to
discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a
consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek
dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request
page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
You defiantly insist on adding material that clearly does not reflect a consensus, and in some cases is extremely POV. From this standpoint, “Due to the precived racism of the law” is simply beyond the pale, in addition to being sloppy and unencyclopedic. You've been reverted at least twice by two different editors; please stop adding material that doesn't reflect consensus. JeffConrad ( talk) 22:35, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 | This is the
discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's
IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may
create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users.
Registering also hides your IP address. |
please do not continually revert. Discuss changes on the talk page. 76.180.115.242 ( talk) 20:18, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
stop vandalizing the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.83.53.253 ( talk) 20:23, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- I am not, and I do not appreciate being accused of it. This is still up for debate. 76.180.115.242 ( talk) 20:24, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war. Note that the
three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the
three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to
discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a
consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek
dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request
page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
76.180.115.242 (
talk) 20:33, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war. Note that the
three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the
three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to
discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a
consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek
dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request
page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
You defiantly insist on adding material that clearly does not reflect a consensus, and in some cases is extremely POV. From this standpoint, “Due to the precived racism of the law” is simply beyond the pale, in addition to being sloppy and unencyclopedic. You've been reverted at least twice by two different editors; please stop adding material that doesn't reflect consensus. JeffConrad ( talk) 22:35, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
|
| This is the
discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's
IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may
create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users.
Registering also hides your IP address. |