Your good faith edit has been reverted again by another editor. The Guinness Book of Records is not a reliable source for biology articles, and it's very unlikely that it is correct if it states that fact. The Ruby-throat is a relatively large hummer, and there are smaller tropical species with faster wing beats. If you have any questions, feel free to ask Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:52, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Frozen (2013 film). Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, 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 be blocked from editing. 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. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. McDoobAU93 19:29, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
They are wrong, the edit helps the article.
- Then take your case to the talk page and see if others agree with you. With next to no sourcing or any other indication of this particular doll's significance, all I can say is "good luck". In all seriousness, if you do add this again that will be your third revert within 24 hours, which, as the notice above states, will very likely lead to a suspension of editing privileges. --McDoobAU93 20:43, 16 April 2014 (UTC)