User talk:Hstambaugh

Edit war

And read wp:editwar note this is a policy (or rule) and not a Wikipedia article. Note as well wp:consensus and WP:ONUS. Slatersteven (talk) 17:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 being blocked from editing—especially as the page in question is currently under restrictions from the Arbitration Committee, if you violate the one-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than one revert on a single page with active Arbitration Committee restrictions 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 one-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the one-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Here's the diff. In response to your edit summary: False consensus effect is a Wikipedia article, while WP:CONSENSUS is a core policy. Edit warring against consensus is grounds for loss of editing privileges. Please self-revert immediately. Generalrelative (talk) 17:46, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't an edit war. It is a simple edit which brings the lede back into line with commonly accepted definitions (Please see Brittanica, Oxford Dictionary, Webster's Dictionary, among other sources). This is to arrest confusion as explained in the description of the original change.

This appears to be gatekeeping on the part of a handful of individuals rather than consensus based upon the community as a whole. If the pursuit of unbiased-accuracy is against Wikipedia standards, I welcome the ban. Rolanwar (talk) 18:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is an edit war (read our policy, note being right is not a justification). And wp:consensus is based upon policy (not logic) based arguments at talk pages, So make a case at talk and get consensus. Slatersteven (talk) 18:04, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ohh and read wp:agf and wp:npa. 18:04, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

As you are new you need to read our wp:policies, if you do not abide by these you will end up with a sanction. Slatersteven (talk) 18:06, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]