User talk:2A00:F41:48B4:2642:3D97:825E:2564:EFA1

October 2023

Hello, 2A00:F41:48B4:2642:3D97:825E:2564:EFA1, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia. Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 17:31, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the 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; read about 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. MrOllie (talk) 17:33, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

I did use the talk page on the article and the user claiming article disruption who is actually disrupting the article.

I asked what exactly is the problem. I did not get an answer. There are etymological and interpretation corrections critically relevant to the original article in question that I made and were undone. 2A00:F41:48B4:2642:3D97:825E:2564:EFA1 (talk) 17:37, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

No. You want to change the article, you must get WP:CONSENSUS for your edits. You do not simply make a cursory comment on the talk page and then resume edit warring. That is disruption. MrOllie (talk) 17:40, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

How exactly am I changing the article? I made corrections to factually inaccurate material.

Seems there is bad faith consensus manipulation between the last 3 editors. 2A00:F41:48B4:2642:3D97:825E:2564:EFA1 (talk) 17:46, 21 October 2023 (UTC)