Jump to content

User talk:General Ization/Archive 24

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20←Archive 22Archive 23Archive 24Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27

Administrators' newsletter – January 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The functionaries email list (functionaries-en@lists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Vandalism on Corey Graves article

It's that same person who vandalized the page 14 months ago, and you issued a final warning to this person, so I thought I'd let you know he did it yet again.--Hmdwgf (talk) 08:05, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed suppress in around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for technical reasons. You can comment in Phabricator if you have objections.
  • The Reply Tool feature, which is a part of Discussion Tools, will be opt-out for everyone logged in or logged out starting 7 February 2022. Editors wishing to comment on this can do so in the relevant Village Pump discussion.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:01, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

China flag sorry

sorry from ruining the china flag. 2001:48F8:4:31A:4070:A6B6:7F72:15FF (talk) 22:18, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Sign you comment

Will you please sign your comment you left at the RfC at Talk:Jussie Smollett. Thanks! Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 23:17, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Why did you revert my edit?

I noticed you reverted my edit on this article, Disease, but why did you revert it? 2603:8000:F400:FCEA:8C0A:C582:420A:E119 (talk) 16:13, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Because the article Disease has not been reviewed under the Good Article nomination process, and therefore your edit was inappropriate and the {{good article}} template is not appropriate to place on that article. General Ization Talk 00:00, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Re: February 2022

I'm sorry, I thought I cited the source but then realized I didn't. I was just about to go back and add the source when I received your message. :P ARoyalPrincess (talk) 01:49, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:46, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Answer

Tell me, what source did Seabass715 use to make the change? There is no source. But you only relate to me because I did not present the source. Why? Isn't that discrimination? In addition, from government sources, I only took information about the composition of the government, not the propaganda I know how to avoid. There is no more reliable source for the composition of government. I can cite other sources https://rulers.org/ and https://www.worldstatesmen.org/ that I have checked for a long time and in terms of archontology they are impeccable but I don't know who from Wikipedia he decreed that he was not trustworthy for some reason, which I only suspect. However, there should be more flexibility and each case analyzed separately and not from a rigid position, a source decreed that it is not reliable to remain so regardless of the circumstances. However, from what I have seen in your contributions, archontology is not a concern, so you should refrain from intervening in a field that you do not know. and generally have constructive, not destructive contributions and apply the same criteria to everyone. Don't be afraid, I'm totally against Putin and his war against Ukraine, as well as against the secessionists in Donetsk and Lugansk, but objective information takes precedence over sympathy and dislike. on the other hand you must know with threats you don't solve anything and I'm not afraid of such a thing. If threats, obtuseness, discrimination and stubbornness are the only arguments, I have clarified your status as a contributor to Wikipedia. Bogdan Uleia (talk) 05:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

@Bogdan Uleia: It has nothing to do with "archontology", the quality or accuracy of the content you are replacing, or the Russo-Ukraine war. The Wikipedia policies I linked in the message I left on your Talk page are not negotiable. Read them, please. Your edits require cited sources, inline with the content, not in your edit summary. You did not do so. If you fail to cite your sources, the content you add can and should be removed, and if you repeatedly add content without citations, you will be blocked from editing. It's that simple. General Ization Talk 12:15, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
@Bogdan Uleia: Also, since you seem to be have the notion that I am treating you unfairly because of some prejudice against you or your subject matter, read Assume good faith. General Ization Talk 12:23, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
This is my final answer. That's it, be happy! You won. I give up fighting with the windmills, because the wisest gives up first. In Romanian we have a little poetry Easily you convince a dunderhead//Even easier on a wise man//Neither you heavenly father nor all the gods in heaven//Can't convince a half-learned.// If the formal issues regarding the source take precedence over the accuracy of the information, I am completely clear. However, you confirm what I have already said, you continue to discriminate against me and harass me. And you also confirm the assessments I made about your character. You already won, forget me and stop watching all my posts. I already forgot about you, you're just an insignificant incident in my Wikioedia contributor activity.Bogdan Uleia (talk) 22:36, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
@Bogdan Uleia: I assure you that I will be watching your edits (not "posts", as posts are not what we do here) for some time to come, not because I am interested in a fight (I am not, and Wikipedia is not a battleground), but because it is clear that you still do not understand, and apparently do not care to try to understand, our policies. General Ization Talk 23:45, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Boy, I'm starving. You became obsessed with me. It's already psychiatric. Try a check-up at a specialist, you may have a chance to heal. Good thing you don't know my personal data because I should call the police for protection. Do you really want to remove me from Wikipedia? I don't lose anything by that anyway. Will only the accuracy of the information suffer? When do you change my contributions, do you at least check if they are correct or not? I don't think so because the field of archontology is beyond you. You are just an obsessed person who has nothing else to do but follow me in particular, because there are so many people who give no source anywhere but leave them alone. For you, it is not the substance that matters, but the form. another symptom of psychiatric illness. It seems that it is not a matter of character but of a more serious one. Don't bother answering me. I was wrong when I got into a conversation with a mentally ill person. Although I'm not religious, I make a cross and say "God forbid!"Bogdan Uleia (talk) 20:44, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Spacelord Knyte

See this.[1]. They've posted to my talk page and asked me a question on theirs, but I just don't have the time to waste. NOTHERE soon I think. Doug Weller talk 14:28, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Oy vey. General Ization Talk 03:34, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
Blocked them. Their statement about an infinite number of IPs available plus the edits, clearly NOTHERE. Doug Weller talk 16:25, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi?

Mind if I semi your page for spell? I can do an hour or more if you like. OhNoitsJamie Talk 05:47, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

 Already done. El_C 06:32, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Standard Time

How is it unsourced — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blue Wave Studios (talk • contribs) 19:37, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

@Blue Wave Studios: Because you did not cite any source, much less a reliable source. See your Talk page for more information. General Ization Talk 20:17, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
@Blue Wave Studios: Also, your edit is factually incorrect. A bill that passed in the U.S. Senate has not been passed by "Congress", and the bill would not mean that "Americans would no longer need to change their clocks in favor of (DST) Daylight Savings Time", if by that you mean that unadjusted Standard Time would remain in effect year-round. The bill would make the time scheme otherwise known as Daylight Saving Time effective year-round. Your wording of this is ambiguous, if not completely wrong. General Ization Talk 20:23, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Reversion on Talk:COVID-19 pandemic

Your recent revert doesn't make sense. You wrote "unexplained supression of a reference in the explanation of consensus". My edit neither suppressed a reference, nor was it used in the explanation of consensus as far as I am aware. Could you explain why you reverted? Pabsoluterince (talk) 00:26, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

@Pabsoluterince: Your edit added HTML comment directives around a reference for the explanation of consensus (linked to three of the elements described in that consensus). Your edit summary was "Not dead yet," which did not explain your reasoning for the edit (hence it was unexplained). The net effect of your edit was to suppress the appearance of those references in three locations in the reflist associated with those items in the explanation of concensus, and to replace them with an empty "^". Thus: you performed the unexplained suppression of a reference in the explanation of consensus. Not sure how I could have been any clearer in my edit summary, and I still don't understand the purpose of your edit. General Ization Talk 00:34, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
OK, maybe not. Hang on a moment. In the meantime, can you explain what you were intending to do? General Ization Talk 00:38, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
So, I misunderstood the location of your edit (in the {{press}} template), and its effect. However, I'm still unclear why you were suppressing (preventing the display of) that item (the New Republic article) in the {{press}} template of the Talk page header. Care to explain? General Ization Talk 00:43, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
The reason I did it is because the first link to the article is to the archived version of the page when the link to the original article isn't dead yet. I did not suppressed the item. The article was still there after my edit. Pabsoluterince (talk) 00:47, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
So it is, and was. My apologies. I've restored your edit. General Ization Talk 00:50, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
No worries . Thank you. Pabsoluterince (talk) 00:52, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Internet Archive Scholar vs. JSTOR

Hello, I see on your user page that you use JSTOR and I'd like to know more about your experience. By my calculations, a good 70 % of the main JSTOR content is now available for everyone at Internet Archive Scholar, with full text search provided e.g. at https://scholar.archive.org/ . The service is still in beta, but I've used it for some source-finding and it seems quite usable to me; I wonder whether that's just my experience. If you have a chance, the next time you'd be looking for a source on Google Scholar or JSTOR or similar, to perform the same search on IA scholar instead, I'd be curious to hear how it ends up. Thanks, Nemo 19:06, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

English literature

Regarding your reversion here [2], the page on English studies begins by saying it is usually simply called English”. I don’t oppose your revision as I agree “English literature” is more specific, however by the article’s own admission, it is common to call it “English”. dizzyflamingo (talk) 04:03, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

@Dizzyflamingo: A little unclear why what English studies says is significant, since the source makes clear that English literature was Thomas's major. General Ization Talk 04:06, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
Are those not the same thing? English studies is the study of English literature dizzyflamingo (talk) 04:27, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
@Dizzyflamingo: English studies include: the study of literature (especially novels, plays, short stories, and poetry), the majority of which comes from Britain, the United States, and Ireland (although English-language literature from any country may be studied, and local or national literature is usually emphasized in any given country); English composition, including writing essays, short stories, and poetry; English language arts, including the study of grammar, usage, and style; and English sociolinguistics, including discourse analysis of written and spoken texts in the English language, the history of the English language, English language learning and teaching, and the study of World Englishes, as reported at English studies. In any case, when there is any doubt, we use the language our sources use, and our source says he majored in English literature; therefore, so shall we. General Ization Talk 04:30, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
Fair enough, cheers dizzyflamingo (talk) 04:35, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Steve Wilhite

On 26 March 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Steve Wilhite, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:56, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi there....

It is reliable. It's on his Official IG. Without sounding like a *nickname for richard* please tell me how I should've done it. I'm still leaning how WiKi works and I want to do it right. -KK KillingKiddo (talk) 05:44, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

@KillingKiddo: See WP:BURDEN. You must provide citations of reliable sources for any content that you add that is likely to be challenged, especially if it involves the biography of a living person. If you do not do so, the content you add can and should be removed, and if you persistently do so you can be blocked from editing. Merely saying "it's reliable" does not make it verifiable. Most of this is already stated (and the policies linked) in the message I left on your Talk page, and I note that this is not your first warning concerning this issue. General Ization Talk 06:17, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Access to Special:RevisionDelete has been expanded to include users who have the deletelogentry and deletedhistory rights. This means that those in the Researcher user group and Checkusers who are not administrators can now access Special:RevisionDelete. The users able to view the special page after this change are the 3 users in the Researcher group, as there are currently no checkusers who are not already administrators. (T301928)
  • When viewing deleted revisions or diffs on Special:Undelete a back link to the undelete page for the associated page is now present. (T284114)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:13, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

GOCE April 2022 newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors April 2022 Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the April newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since December 2021.

Election results: Jonesey95 retired as lead coordinator. Reidgreg was approved to fill this role after an 18-month absence from the coordinator team, and Baffle gab1978 was chosen as an assistant coordinator following a one-year break. Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Tenryuu continued on as long-standing assistant coordinators.

January Drive: Of the 22 editors who signed up, 16 editors claimed 146 copy edits including 45 requests. (details)

February Blitz: This one-week effort focused on requests and a theme of Africa and African diaspora history. Of the 12 editors who signed up, 6 editors recorded 21 copy edits, including 4 requests. (details)

March Drive: Of the 28 editors who signed up, 18 claimed 116 copy edits including 25 requests. (details)

April Blitz: This one-week copy editing event has been scheduled for 17–23 April, sign up now!

Progress report: As of 11 April, copy editors have removed approximately 500 articles from the backlog and completed 127 copy-editing requests during 2022. The backlog has been hovering at about 1,100 tagged articles for the past six months.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Tenryuu

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:42, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:34, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Administrators using the mobile web interface can now access Special:Block directly from user pages. (T307341)
  • The IP Info feature has been deployed to all wikis as a Beta Feature. Any autoconfirmed user may enable the feature using the "IP info" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features. Autoconfirmed users will be able to access basic information about an IP address that includes the country and connection method. Those with advanced privileges (admin, bureaucrat, checkuser) will have access to extra information that includes the Internet Service Provider and more specific location.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:55, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Supporting disruptive edits

Hello. My I ask why you are reverting all of this user’s edits and supporting all of this users edits which are mostly inappropriate to begin with such as removing content or adding unsourced content??? You are also edit waring as well to support recent additions or removals. OyMosby (talk) 03:55, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Of course you may. I believed I was reverting vandalism and restoring the stable version. I have since reviewed the entire series, and have seen that was not the case. Thanks for reverting my changes. General Ization Talk 04:01, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Fair enough. These IPs are doing my head in. Some of these articles may need to be locked. Cheers OyMosby (talk) 04:02, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

June GOCE newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors June 2022 Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the June 2022 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since April 2022. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.

Blitz: of the 16 editors who signed up for our April Copy Editing Blitz, 12 completed at least one copy-edit, and between them removed 21 articles from the copy-editing backlog. Barnstars awarded are here.

Drive: 27 editors signed up for our May Backlog Elimination Drive; of these, 20 copy-edited at least one article. 144 articles were copy-edited, and 88 articles from our target months August and September 2021 were removed from the backlog. Barnstars awarded are here.

Blitz: our June Copy Editing Blitz, starting at 00:01, 19 June and closing at 00:59, 25 June (UTC), will focus on articles tagged for copy edit in September and October 2021, and requests from March, April and May 2022. Barnstars awarded will be posted here.

Progress report: As of 07:12, 14 June 2022 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have completed 209 requests since 1 January and the backlog stands at 1,404 articles.

Election news: Nominations for our half-yearly Election of Coordinators continues until 23:50 on 15 June (UTC), after which, voting will commence until 23:59, 30 June (UTC). All Wikipedians in good standing (active and not blocked, banned, or under ArbCom or community sanctions) are eligible and self-nominations are welcomed.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Tenryuu

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello

I see you have been on Wikipedia for a long time,I once saw a wikipedia article that states that a wikipedian can be an apprentice to another Wikipedia am I right?. I would love to be your apprentice because I have important questions and answers I need to know.. Thank you. Uricdivine (talk) 23:05, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Anti-vandalism tools?

Hi, I'm just curious if you were using anything special for the reverts you made recently including how you're watching for the changes because you seemed to be getting them very fast. PHANTOMTECH (talk) 05:20, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Just Twinkle, and refreshing the page history periodically. I could say the same for you. Thanks for your help. General Ization Talk 05:22, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, I was using WP:Huggle. Once the whole thing was going for a bit I turned off the revert delay and was shocked at how often you were beating me since your edit summaries didn't indicate you were using a tool, I was pretty jealous of your speed :) PHANTOMTECH (talk) 05:44, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
@PhantomTech: I imagine the edit conflicts were annoying from time to time. 😊 Thanks again. General Ization Talk 05:48, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Yes a little :) but obviously that's through no fault of your own. I just wish Huggle handled them better. PHANTOMTECH (talk) 05:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

YoungForever revision summary

Can you identify the specific edit or edits where you think this editor misused the edit summary? Because in reviewing their edits at Blood & Treasure, I see none. Note that I was not reviewing the quality of the edits themselves, but looking for any misuse of the edit summary as you asserted. General Ization Talk 22:21, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Again, "and" and "&", and linebreak are not same thing. We go by according to credits not how you want it to be. Is clearly not a valid edit summary and yet another misuse of the field as well as a personal attack when the user constantly doesn't like my edits. Xeditboy (talk) 04:18, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
@Xeditboy: That is a perfectly valid edit summary, and if you think that's a personal attack, you need to find another place to edit. Stop harassing YoungForever. General Ization Talk 04:22, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
Excuse me but an edit summary is a summary of an edit, not a place for personal comments. The last sentence is completely out of line. Xeditboy (talk) 19:29, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
@Xeditboy: The summary summarized the reason why the content was changed. You may not like the editor's comments, but that does not mean they violate any policy. There is no policy that other editors should only make comments you like. I suggest you move on. General Ization Talk 19:40, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
If you can read the reason was in the first sentence. The last sentence was completely unnecessary and is inflammatory as well as demeaning. Xeditboy (talk) 01:19, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
@Xeditboy: please be aware of the old saying about glass houses. MarnetteD|Talk 19:46, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
@MarnetteD:Leave it alone is a directive and not a personal comment. Xeditboy (talk) 01:19, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

RE: Draft talk:Josco Boy

Just FYI, I had nominated Draft:Josco Boy for speedy deletion per CSD G11, but accidentally sent the notice to the draft talk itself instead of the user talk, hence the redirect. Hope this clears things up. Liliana (UwU) 03:49, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

@LilianaUwU: Yeah, I realized the notice had been misdelivered to your talk page, and was about to remove it when you replied to it. General Ization Talk 03:50, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:54, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2022).

Technical news

  • user_global_editcount is a new variable that can be used in abuse filters to avoid affecting globally active users. (T130439)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The New Pages Patrol queue has around 10,000 articles to be reviewed. As all administrators have the patrol right, please consider helping out. The queue is here. For further information on the state of the project, see the latest NPP newsletter.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:28, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

TMZ Ital

Hi I see you reverted my TMZ change. Am I wrong in assuming movie and TV titles are in italics? Joe M Joemcphilly1960 (talk) 17:14, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Actually, you are correct. However, the TV show associated with TMZ is called TMZ on TV, not TMZ, which refers to the production company and its Web site TMZ.com. General Ization Talk 23:14, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Why did you revert my edit?

The page for Shrek (character) was clearly semi-protected against vandalism, so I had to do what I did. Did You chop down that shark (talk) 01:35, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

@Did You chop down that shark: Leave the task of applying protection indicator templates to admins and bots, please. You did not "have" to do this, and I'm sure you can find something better to do. General Ization Talk 02:52, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
Ok, but can you please ask then to change it? Did You chop down that shark (talk) 15:29, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
@Did You chop down that shark: What, may I ask, is the purpose of your intense interest in the template used to indicate the reason for the semi-protection of this and other articles you edited attempting to change the template? In this case, the actual level of protection is exactly the same, regardless of the original reason for the protection being applied or the indicator used to announce it. The article Shrek (character) has been protected for more than four years, and the specific template used to announce this protection has been the same during this entire time.
I suggest, again, that you move on and find something better to do. General Ization Talk 21:38, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
I’m just trying to be consistent. Did You chop down that shark (talk) 22:36, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for helping me post good references on the Henry Ford II page. I appreciate the constructive feedback! Let me know if there's anything else I can do to improve that update. Have a great evening!

GeorgeRoush5 (talk) 04:05, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

aflac

someone has rewritten the aflac page and made it into an advert. i do not know if i require special privileges to undo this. Space pierogi (talk) 00:58, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

@Space pierogi: Bring it up on the article's Talk page. The tone of the page cannot easily be "undone", and will probably require the work of multiple editors and some time to correct. General Ization Talk 01:01, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
ok. thank you. Space pierogi (talk) 01:03, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

The CW

Your recent editing history at The CW 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 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. Tazetheog ([[User talk:|talk]]) 01:50, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tazetheog: You apparently do not know what an edit war is. Please review the information at WP:EW to learn about it. It does not mean that someone disagrees with you. General Ization Talk 01:52, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:General_Ization/Archive_24&oldid=1104817368"