User talk:Macktheknifeau/Archive7

September 2022

Your recent editing history at Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence and Avondale 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. DrKay (talk) 16:59, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

When you continue to revert legitimate edits, and ignore requests to start a discussion over consensus if you continue to disagree with them, it is YOU who is attempting to start an edit war. Macktheknifeau (talk) 17:16, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

New message from GA Melbourne

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Matthew Guy § Removal of section (2022 Victorian state election). - GA Melbourne (talk) 13:58, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

My problem with your edit summary dated 14:37 22/03

Hi Macktheknifeau,

I have reorganised the article 2023 New South Wales state election to include controversies surrounding Perrottet under the "Campaign" section rather than Background, as in previous NSW election articles, and have decreased the detail in which the summary of the Helen Perrottet ambulance incident goes into to better pair with the level of detail that other 'campaign event' inclusions in the article have.

However I am writing to you not to notify you of this, but to let you know that your edit summary which read "Just because you don't think it's relevant doesn't make it so. Don't revert it again." was totally inappropriate within the context of the consensus-based decision-making which occurs on Wikipedia. I engaged in WP:BOLD and cordially invited editors who disagreed with the change to use the talk page to discuss, but instead of doing so, you let me know that your view of how the article should be constructed took precedent over mine. If you had engaged on the talk page, you would have learned that my opposition to its inclusion was because it was not relevant in that Background section but should instead be a section about the campaign as a whole. Edit summaries such as this are not conductive of consensus decision making and certainly do not create a safe environment for editors to engage in WP:BOLD. You do not have the right to tell any editor to refrain from making attempts at good faith, constructive edits. I would invite you to reflect on this. Thanks. J2m5 (talk) 05:43, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

k Macktheknifeau (talk) 07:20, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Melbourne City v Melbourne Victory (17 December 2022), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Forfeit.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Western Sydney Wanderers FC, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Allianz Stadium (Sydney).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

«2019 Venezuelan Coup d'état»

Hey, I'm here to remind you of something.

Regardless of what you think is going on in Venezuela, you are here to Provide Sources and yet, providing your point of view on these controversial events does not help.

A source would have helped, or more, because there are several studies of coups in the past, as well as an entire article dedicated to them. It's funny changing things in one article, not counting other articles like here And no, I'm not saying that you refrain from commenting based on the edition of the article, but refrain from commenting on the supposed "facts" as if this encyclopedia were not "impartial" but "biased" like the rest coverage of this type that exist on the Internet.

It is not possible to qualify this event by what you call it, not because a politician says so, regardless of his "connections" which according to you make him a "reliable" source to edit the entire context of the article. But it would be possible "allegations of a coup d'état" plus their sources, your opinion like mine on this fact is irrelevant to me, I am just telling you the already written rules. Thank you. --DeskOfficer95 (talk) 15:25, 03 Aug 2023 (UTC)

References

Lancaster Park

Kia ora. As per MOS:LEAD I've removed unsourced info from the lead section of Lancaster Park, as I couldn't find that information elsewhere in the article. It would certainly be nice to have information about the memorial gates, so feel free to add that info to the main body of the article along with a source for it. Thanks. DrThneed (talk) 03:14, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Nah I'm good. If other people want to be POINTY and reject reality that's their decision. Good job making the page look like shit by adding pointless tags for no reason. Macktheknifeau (talk) 04:30, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

September 2023

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. (I refer to the section above). You've been around Wikipedia long enough to know better. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:29, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

ok buddy Macktheknifeau (talk) 08:50, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Talia Younis

@Macktheknifeau For your change on Talia Younis can you please put a source for it. How u gonna make a claim and not back it up? Cheers, JC Kotisow (talk) 21:22, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

November 2023

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Mercy-class hospital ship. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. - wolf 17:58, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

You're the one reverting legitimate edits, not me. Macktheknifeau (talk) 23:20, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Added note

It's not "pointy wikilawyering", it's called the rules, and you've been around long enough to know that when you add content, it needs to be supported by sourcing, and if those sources are already on the page, you just repeat the source (and I've already pointed you towards that). You also know that unsupported content can be removed by any editor at any time. What are you trying to accomplish here anyway? Just add a ref already. - wolf 18:07, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

If you care so much about adding pointless additional sourcing then just add it yourself already. Macktheknifeau (talk) 23:19, 14 November 2023 (UTC)