| Revision as of 21:52, 17 January 2010 editRavensfire (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers88,676 edits →General comment: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:58, 17 January 2010 edit undoNimbusWeb (talk | contribs)1,727 edits →General commentNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| You may want to read the ] policy article. One of the key parts is that when a change is reverted it is taken to the talk page, not continually readded. When that happens, you start an edit war, which rarely ends well. Your path right now is heading towards a block for edit-warring - please consider reviewing how you edit. <b><font color="darkred">]</font></b> <font color="black">(])</font> 21:52, 17 January 2010 (UTC) | You may want to read the ] policy article. One of the key parts is that when a change is reverted it is taken to the talk page, not continually readded. When that happens, you start an edit war, which rarely ends well. Your path right now is heading towards a block for edit-warring - please consider reviewing how you edit. <b><font color="darkred">]</font></b> <font color="black">(])</font> 21:52, 17 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
| I did take it to the talk page. Please have a look at the ] talk page. All I am trying to do is stop editors who are removing multiple fully referenced sentences despite no consensus having been reached on the talk page. Because there are two of them and they are obviously higher up in the editorial pecking order my view is not considered as important as theirs.] (]) 21:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:58, 17 January 2010
Hi. This is my talk page.NimbusWeb (talk) 12:20, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
General comment
You may want to read the WP:BRD policy article. One of the key parts is that when a change is reverted it is taken to the talk page, not continually readded. When that happens, you start an edit war, which rarely ends well. Your path right now is heading towards a block for edit-warring - please consider reviewing how you edit. Ravensfire (talk) 21:52, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
I did take it to the talk page. Please have a look at the Biosequestration talk page. All I am trying to do is stop editors who are removing multiple fully referenced sentences despite no consensus having been reached on the talk page. Because there are two of them and they are obviously higher up in the editorial pecking order my view is not considered as important as theirs.NimbusWeb (talk) 21:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC)