Hello! If there's any reason you'd like to contact me, feel equally free to leave me a comment here or wikimail me- I should be able to reply fairly quickly in either case.
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
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 BRD 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Merphee ( talk • contribs)
Per this discussion, you are banned from all pages and edits related to living persons (as that term is used in the policy on biographies of living persons) for six months, subject to the usual exceptions. GoldenRing ( talk) 10:38, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Here's my attempt at understanding your reasoning- there are a few alternate explanations:
Help me out here - are any of these close to your belief as to why I violated BLP? You say that 'Twitter will never be an acceptable source' as though I at some point argued such a thing. It's a bit orthogonal and I'm wondering where the disconnect is. I don't believe the tweet was a source, and the section I restored wasn't arguing that we should use it as a source, it was saying 'here are the allegations'. Please note that the BLPN discussion I was responding to did include several reliable sources discussing this. PeterTheFourth ( talk) 13:18, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
For example, it would be appropriate to begin a discussion by stating "This link has serious allegations about subject; should we summarize this someplace in the article?". Is the problem that the original source of the allegations was also linked when somebody started a discussion on how to cover the allegations in the article? PeterTheFourth ( talk) 13:25, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Shinealittlelight ( talk) 20:36, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello! If there's any reason you'd like to contact me, feel equally free to leave me a comment here or wikimail me- I should be able to reply fairly quickly in either case.
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
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 BRD 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Merphee ( talk • contribs)
Per this discussion, you are banned from all pages and edits related to living persons (as that term is used in the policy on biographies of living persons) for six months, subject to the usual exceptions. GoldenRing ( talk) 10:38, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Here's my attempt at understanding your reasoning- there are a few alternate explanations:
Help me out here - are any of these close to your belief as to why I violated BLP? You say that 'Twitter will never be an acceptable source' as though I at some point argued such a thing. It's a bit orthogonal and I'm wondering where the disconnect is. I don't believe the tweet was a source, and the section I restored wasn't arguing that we should use it as a source, it was saying 'here are the allegations'. Please note that the BLPN discussion I was responding to did include several reliable sources discussing this. PeterTheFourth ( talk) 13:18, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
For example, it would be appropriate to begin a discussion by stating "This link has serious allegations about subject; should we summarize this someplace in the article?". Is the problem that the original source of the allegations was also linked when somebody started a discussion on how to cover the allegations in the article? PeterTheFourth ( talk) 13:25, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Shinealittlelight ( talk) 20:36, 6 September 2019 (UTC)