User talk:EnglishWelshGuy92
Welcome!
[edit]Hi EnglishWelshGuy92! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! Ed [talk] [OMT] 23:56, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- Please stop edit-warring at German battleship Bismarck. If you continue to disrupt the page, you will be blocked from editing. Parsecboy (talk) 19:08, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
- I was merely trying to add some more specific content, that’s all. She took an absolute battering AND was scuttled. I thought her Wiki page should show both. EnglishWelshGuy92 (talk) 19:14, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
- The problem is, the content you're changing has proven to be highly contentious (read through the talk page archives that go back for at least a decade and a half, if you have many hours to burn), so any changes need to be discussed first. Parsecboy (talk) 19:39, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
- I was merely trying to add some more specific content, that’s all. She took an absolute battering AND was scuttled. I thought her Wiki page should show both. EnglishWelshGuy92 (talk) 19:14, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Talk page consensus
[edit]I'm here to give you an introduction to consensus on Wikipedia. In terms of the page German battleship Bismarck, there has been extensive discussion as to whether "sunk" or "scuttled" should be use. Consensus was reached to determine that "scuttled" should be used.
That is why your edits are continually reverted, because discussion has already taken place on the topic - as per the warning provided in the source editing section. I have posted it in an edit reversion previously, however I will repost it here for you: "SCUTTLED" PER EXTENSIVE DISCUSSIONS ON Talk:German battleship Bismarck. SEE TALK PAGE AND GET CONSENSUS BEFORE CHANGING
.
If you wish to make an edit as to whether the ship was scuttled or sunk, please go to the talk page and gain consensus on the topic before doing so. Your edits thus far seem to constitute disruptive editing, warnings will be applied if you continue without gaining proper consensus. CommissarDoggoTalk? 19:21, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your detailed reply.
- I apologise if I come across as rude or anything else like that, I assure you that isn’t my intention.
- My reasoning for the edit to say ‘sunk’ rather than ‘scuttled’ was partly at least because of a comment from Bob Ballard himself, “It was the British who sunk the Bismarck regardless of who delivered the final blow”.
- And also, having read multiple books & seen several documentaries about the Bismarck, I have seen that most experts do seem to agree that Bismarck would’ve gone down eventually & that her crew setting scuttling charges only made it happen sooner rather than later.
- Apologies again for any (unintentional) tone of rudeness. EnglishWelshGuy92 (talk) 19:27, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
- I don't believe you come off as rude, I apologise if I made it seem like I believe you were, I only wanted to make sure you know how Wikipedia works as a general rule.
- Your edit is sound and well reasoned, under any other circumstances I don't think anyone would bat an eye. That being said, as the notice states, it still needs a backing of consensus on the talk page unfortunately. CommissarDoggoTalk? 19:41, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Salisbury rail crash
[edit]The fact that you claim to know what you are talking about is not a good reason to dispute the findings of the RAIB. I suggest you read the report which clearly states the SWR driver left his braking too late by his own admission. He missed his own marker by quite some distance. Under dry conditions he could have possibly got away with it at the expense of an emergency stop. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 10:12, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at 2021 Salisbury rail crash 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. Thryduulf (talk) 14:24, 8 July 2024 (UTC)