| Revision as of 03:10, 16 June 2021 editBlueMoonset (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers72,530 edits →June 2021: why the GA nomination was revertedTag: Reverted← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:52, 22 November 2021 edit undoClpo13 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators45,651 edits Adding Discretionary Sanctions Notice (blp) (TW)Tags: Reverted contentious topics alertNext edit → | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| :Modern NFL Historian, please note that per the GA nomination instructions, {{tq|Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article on the article talk page prior to a nomination.}} You have not made any contributions to the article nor consulted with significant contributors to it, which is why your nominations have been reverted. | :Modern NFL Historian, please note that per the GA nomination instructions, {{tq|Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article on the article talk page prior to a nomination.}} You have not made any contributions to the article nor consulted with significant contributors to it, which is why your nominations have been reverted. | ||
| :If you believe the ] article meets the ] and is ready for nomination, you need first to do the consultation by posting a request to ] and allowing seven days for responses to accumulate. If there is then a consensus that the article is ready, and if you are prepared to work on edits to the article during the GA review process, you can make a nomination once the consultation process is over. ] (]) 03:10, 16 June 2021 (UTC) | :If you believe the ] article meets the ] and is ready for nomination, you need first to do the consultation by posting a request to ] and allowing seven days for responses to accumulate. If there is then a consensus that the article is ready, and if you are prepared to work on edits to the article during the GA review process, you can make a nomination once the consultation process is over. ] (]) 03:10, 16 June 2021 (UTC) | ||
| ==Important Notice== | |||
| {{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. ''It does '''not''' imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.'' | |||
| You have shown interest in articles about ], and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called ] is in effect. Any administrator may impose ] on editors who do not strictly follow ], or the ], when making edits related to the topic. | |||
| For additional information, please see the ] and the ] decision ]. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. | |||
| }}<!-- Derived from Template:Ds/alert --> ]<sub>(])</sub> 20:52, 22 November 2021 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:52, 22 November 2021
Test
June 2021
Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Talk:Tom Brady. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Misplaced Pages this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.
If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges on that page. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Misplaced Pages is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. ——Serial 12:30, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
- Modern NFL Historian, please note that per the GA nomination instructions,
Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article on the article talk page prior to a nomination.
You have not made any contributions to the article nor consulted with significant contributors to it, which is why your nominations have been reverted. - If you believe the Tom Brady article meets the GA criteria and is ready for nomination, you need first to do the consultation by posting a request to Talk:Tom Brady and allowing seven days for responses to accumulate. If there is then a consensus that the article is ready, and if you are prepared to work on edits to the article during the GA review process, you can make a nomination once the consultation process is over. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:10, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Important Notice
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.