User talk:Modfather2020
Modfather2020, you are invited to the Teahouse!
[edit]
|
Hi Modfather2020! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:11, 5 March 2020 (UTC) |
March 2020
[edit]
Hello. Some of your recent genre changes, such as the one you made to I Need You (The Kinks song), have conflicted with our neutral point of view and/or verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend you seek consensus for certain edits by discussing the matter on the article's talk page. Thank you. SummerPhDv2.0 02:10, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
April 2020
[edit]
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Jerry Lee Lewis, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 23:27, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did at She's Not You, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 23:41, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- That's strange, I did. The Jerry Lee references didn't say he was blues or honky tonk, and the She's Not You edit was referenced.
Your recent editing history at Jerry Lee Lewis 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Sundayclose (talk) 14:46, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
Sundayclose You ought to chill mate, i was very friendly in my edit summary. You clearly can't read properly. Signing off now, I try being friendly and collaborative on here but everyone's so damn aggressive and uptight.
- Have you ever considered the possibility that everyone seems so aggressive because it is YOU who is making problem edits that the rest of us have to clean up? It's not a coincidence that you have only made about 100 edits and already racked up four warnings. Most people heed the warnings and are careful about repeating the problem edits. Please take a few moments to click the blue links in the warnings above and read some policies. Follow the policies, and most people here will treat you with respect. That includes the policy about personal attacks such as telling people they can't read. You can be a helpful editor here, but take it easy with reverting others until you get some experience, and above all discuss on the talk page if you disagree with someone. Sundayclose (talk) 16:29, 2 April 2020 (UTC)