|
Your recent editing history at Barelvi shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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 your 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. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:54, 20 November 2014 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Lagoonaville reported by User:Lukeno94 (Result: ). Thank you. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:56, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
((unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~))
. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Jackmcbarn (talk) 00:25, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
As I explained, Lagoonaville, there was no major dispute on the Barelvi page until YOU began upsetting an editor consensus. Please stop being stubborn and adversarial. You can't claim there's a neutrality dispute just because you don't like the fact that many other editors disagree with your edits and style of interaction. Try working with them, not against them. I always find the advice of other editors to be highly useful, even when sometimes they edit things I feel strongly about. Don't get into edit warring. Don't violate the three revert rule. You'll get banned if you do. Regards, George Custer's Sabre (talk) 07:39, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Sir i am going through the dispute resolution process and tags are one of them. Lagoonaville (talk) 08:00, 2 December 2014 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Lagoonaville reported by User:Lukeno94 (Result: ). Thank you. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 10:06, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
((unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~))
. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Bbb23 (talk) 11:26, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Lagoonaville (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I stopped editing after the report and the editor continues to revert war on the page he is at 4 reverts Lagoonaville (talk) 22:19, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Decline reason:
No, actually, you didn't. You made two edits, continuing the edit war, after you'd responded to the 3RR report. --jpgordon::==( o ) 22:23, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the ((unblock)) template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
so this editor can get away with breaking 3rr? Any advice on how to deal with the gang over there? How do I include more neutral editors on that page? Lagoonaville (talk) 22:25, 2 December
Really? Gorge's 4th revert isnt a break? Its even noted by an administrator [1]. Im not surprised at your comment here. I will be editing other articles from now on inorder to avoid the types of editors like yourself. Lagoonaville (talk) 03:53, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Im still learning and I appreciate your concern but I will not be editing that article anymore. I was worried many issues would arise when westerners edit an Asian subject. Lagoonaville (talk) 05:04, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello! Here's how to add references from reliable sources for the content you add to Wikipedia. This helps maintain the Wikipedia policy of verifiability.
Adding well formatted references is actually quite easy:
You can read more about this on Help:Edit toolbar or see this video File:RefTools.ogv.
Hope this helps, --Carlos Rojas77 (talk) 15:44, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
((subst:User:Shearonink/ref))
on User:talk pages when needed.