User talk:198.232.48.20

March 2019

Please do not add defamatory content to Wikipedia, as you did to Elizabeth Holmes, especially if it involves living persons. Thank you. Natureium (talk) 20:20, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please do not add defamatory content to Wikipedia, especially if it involves living persons. Thank you. Bradv🍁 20:35, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add defamatory content, as you did at Elizabeth Holmes, you may be blocked from editing. vwilding ^talk 20:43, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

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. See BRD 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. Bradv🍁 20:43, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You should all warn yourselves for getting in an editing war without reason. The change is not defamatory as it says alleged and she has been charged, it is consistent with other articles (see Charles Ponzi), and the only legitimate criticism was the lack of citation, any one of you could have added the citation instead of reverting to the prior version. Clearly people more interested in getting your edit counts up than proper edits.

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:198.232.48.20 reported by User:Natureium (Result: ). Thank you. Natureium (talk) 22:45, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In case you actually do want to discuss the Holmes Thing...

I see you've been potentially edit warring at Elizabeth Holmes. I opened a talk page discussion about the topic Talk:Elizabeth_Holmes#Alleged_fraudster here if you wish to contribute. But because of the BLP issues it's you who needs consensus to include not me to remove. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 22:57, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There are no BLP issues. The reversals were for defamation (it’s not). Another editor changed it for lack of source. 198.232.48.20 (talk) 23:02, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring.

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 ~~~~}}. Killiondude (talk) 23:08, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.