| Revision as of 20:00, 4 December 2012 editChaheel Riens (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers38,510 edits →Reliable sources: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:00, 4 December 2012 edit undo190.46.98.195 (talk) →Reliable sourcesNext edit → | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
| Before you get blocked for a combination of edit warring, disruptive editing, and incivility, please read the policy on using reliable sources, and then you'll understand why is not an invalid POV claim, and not a valid reason for reversion. ] (]) 20:00, 4 December 2012 (UTC) | Before you get blocked for a combination of edit warring, disruptive editing, and incivility, please read the policy on using reliable sources, and then you'll understand why is not an invalid POV claim, and not a valid reason for reversion. ] (]) 20:00, 4 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| :I can find sources that say that Sergeant Pepper is the Beatle's best album. I can find sources that say that War and Peace is the best book ever written. I can find sources that say that British Airways is the world's favourite airline. Putting those claims directly into an article, in the voice of the encyclopaedia, violates NPOV. If you can't understand that, you really shouldn't be editing. You are edit-warring to force blatantly biased material into the encyclopaedia, and that's a very silly thing to do. ] (]) 22:00, 4 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 22:00, 4 December 2012
December 2012
Please read WP:CIV, particularly the section on "Edit summary dos and don'ts", and act accordingly. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Warning
Your recent editing history at Kenny Everett shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:07, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Cleo Rocos shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Theroadislong (talk) 18:22, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
- If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
Reliable sources
Before you get blocked for a combination of edit warring, disruptive editing, and incivility, please read the policy on using reliable sources, and then you'll understand why this is not an invalid POV claim, and not a valid reason for reversion. Chaheel Riens (talk) 20:00, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
- I can find sources that say that Sergeant Pepper is the Beatle's best album. I can find sources that say that War and Peace is the best book ever written. I can find sources that say that British Airways is the world's favourite airline. Putting those claims directly into an article, in the voice of the encyclopaedia, violates NPOV. If you can't understand that, you really shouldn't be editing. You are edit-warring to force blatantly biased material into the encyclopaedia, and that's a very silly thing to do. 190.46.98.195 (talk) 22:00, 4 December 2012 (UTC)