Hello, I'm
Rsk6400. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a
neutral point of view. Your recent edit to
Origins of the American Civil War seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thank you.
Rsk6400 (
talk) 18:28, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
- Hi there, the edits I made were entirely in step with the criteria of objectivity Wikipedia gives on its associated page, and all edits were either made to get rid of already existing biases in the page, or to point out those biases where they existed, most especially as it involves particular historiographical schools of thought.
- The page, as it stands, is written within the "New Left" paradigm of historical thought, and my edits were made simply to point that out, and to give our readers access to other historiographical schools.
- In the future, if you believe some element of my work is biased, please correct only those biased elements and give a citation to which of Wikipedia's rules is violated. Undoing all my work in the page without providing any particular reason is damaging to the scholarly mission of our website. St.Sidonius ( talk) 19:30, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi St.Sidonius! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of
Origins of the American Civil War several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the
edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.
All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Origins of the American Civil War, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 20:24, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
- Hi there,
- I understand our policy concerning edit warring, and as I wrote to you just now, I think it would be helpful in avoiding this if you were to instead point out specific instances of "bias" and edit those specifically, rather than simply deleting all my work.
- For example, you haven't mentioned any problem in clarifying the section about the status of Republican ballots in the South, but in an effort to change what I wrote specifically about the New Left, you deleted this other change as well.
- It would be much easier and more beneficial in coming to a consensus if, instead of just undoing the entirety of my contribution in its diversity, you only changed the pieces you had issue with.
- This being the case, I would very much appreciate it if you would restore the changes I made, sans the particular areas you disagreed with. Doing this will make it easier to move on and talk about the changes which weren't to your taste.
St.Sidonius (
talk) 20:34, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
- Please respect WP rules, which include such things as WP:CONSENSUS and WP:NOTLEAD. The latter means that we don't criticise academic consensus as coming from the "New Left" or something similar. Rsk6400 ( talk) 05:37, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Rsk6400. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a
neutral point of view. Your recent edit to
Origins of the American Civil War seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thank you.
Rsk6400 (
talk) 18:28, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
- Hi there, the edits I made were entirely in step with the criteria of objectivity Wikipedia gives on its associated page, and all edits were either made to get rid of already existing biases in the page, or to point out those biases where they existed, most especially as it involves particular historiographical schools of thought.
- The page, as it stands, is written within the "New Left" paradigm of historical thought, and my edits were made simply to point that out, and to give our readers access to other historiographical schools.
- In the future, if you believe some element of my work is biased, please correct only those biased elements and give a citation to which of Wikipedia's rules is violated. Undoing all my work in the page without providing any particular reason is damaging to the scholarly mission of our website. St.Sidonius ( talk) 19:30, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi St.Sidonius! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of
Origins of the American Civil War several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the
edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.
All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Origins of the American Civil War, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 20:24, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
- Hi there,
- I understand our policy concerning edit warring, and as I wrote to you just now, I think it would be helpful in avoiding this if you were to instead point out specific instances of "bias" and edit those specifically, rather than simply deleting all my work.
- For example, you haven't mentioned any problem in clarifying the section about the status of Republican ballots in the South, but in an effort to change what I wrote specifically about the New Left, you deleted this other change as well.
- It would be much easier and more beneficial in coming to a consensus if, instead of just undoing the entirety of my contribution in its diversity, you only changed the pieces you had issue with.
- This being the case, I would very much appreciate it if you would restore the changes I made, sans the particular areas you disagreed with. Doing this will make it easier to move on and talk about the changes which weren't to your taste.
St.Sidonius (
talk) 20:34, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
- Please respect WP rules, which include such things as WP:CONSENSUS and WP:NOTLEAD. The latter means that we don't criticise academic consensus as coming from the "New Left" or something similar. Rsk6400 ( talk) 05:37, 27 July 2023 (UTC)