User talk:MartinEden5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Please discuss major changes to David Lifton at Talk:David Lifton[edit]

Your recent editing history at David Lifton shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Thanks! Location (talk) 07:11, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

User:Noaccountaccount[edit]

If you want to talk to Noaccountaccount, leave a message on user talk:Noaccountaccount. I removed your message on User:Noaccountaccount as that is the wrong place to put a message. Cheers.

Jim1138 (talk) 07:13, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring report[edit]

I have started a section about your edit warring at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:MartinEden5 reported by User:Fram (Result: ). Fram (talk) 09:57, 9 March 2012 (UTC)


You have been blocked from editing for a short time for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Kuru (talk) 12:40, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

David Lifton[edit]

One of the problems with the entry on David Lifton and his book, BEST EVIDENCE, is that after all the edits and changes, there remained no reasonably accurate summary of what the book was all about. Moreover, many of the previous edits were obviously biased and unfair. For example, of what significance is it that David Lifton was dismissed from UCLA for not completing two "incompletes," in 1966, because of his Kennedy research, while failing to mention that he subsequently earned a Master's degree from Cornell University? And why should the editing of the writeup be so severe, that instead of a proper summary of the book's major thesis (that the President's body was altered--i.e., bullets removed and wounds altered--prior to autopsy), there instead is an overemphasis on the question of whether the body was removed from the coffin prior to take-off. To have an entry on David Lifton and BEST EVIDENCE without a proper summary of the book's major thesis quite unfair, if not thoroughly improper. In his many lecture appearances, the issue of Air Force One is relatively secondary. In other words, the precise details of exactly how the body was intercepted is less important than the massive evidence that it was intercepted. Professor Wesley Liebeler understood this (as described in Chapter 9 of BEST EVIDENCE). We can at least hope that the average intelligent reader of this Wikipedia entry will understand that too. The fact that this particular detail is (at present) not fully resolved, should not prevent a proper description of the book, when viewed in its totality. No one is saying that BEST EVIDENCE has completely "solved" the "crime of the century," but we should at least understand the contribution it has made, and its importance in providing a new (and some would say revolutionary) way of looking at the various "contradictions" in the medical evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartinEden5 (talkcontribs) 08:09, 22 May 2012‎ (UTC)

Thank you for the message you left at my talk page. As mentioned previously at the top of this page, the best place to discuss edits or changes to the article is at Talk:David Lifton. Location (talk) 15:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Still around?[edit]

I like some of the work you've done on JFK assassination articles. Just checking to see if you are still active in WP. --Hutcher (talk) 19:39, 17 March 2013 (UTC)