User talk:Weaponcheck

Welcome!

Hello, Weaponcheck, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! SovalValtos (talk) 06:34, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 2019

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at StG 44. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, 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 lose their editing privileges. 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. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. Dorsetonian (talk) 19:18, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at StG 44 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. Dorsetonian (talk) 19:57, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, if you continue to revert the additional information back, it will be considered a editing war. Please stop engaging in an editing war. Weaponcheck (talk) 21:30, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Weaponcheck reported by User:Dorsetonian (Result: ). Thank you. Dorsetonian (talk) 21:37, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are breaking the rules, history doesn't change on your opinion.Weaponcheck (talk) 21:46, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How many people need to tell you to use the talk page, before you get the hint? When changes you make are reverted, the onus is on you to seek consensus for the version you seek, not to just keep resubmitting the same content over and over again. This is the basis of our bold, revert, discuss cycle, and failure to observe this is considered very disruptive. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:13, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Who came and talked to me? Oh wait, no one. Just delete as though information is useless. Childish. Weaponcheck (talk) 23:30, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at StG 44. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 22:26, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]