User talk:BobMcK

January 2018

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Sheldon Adelson. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:54, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Sheldon Adelson shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 your 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. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:54, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. New at this, you see. Just figured out I was getting these messages, in fact. I thought I was arguing a valid point. Not even sure how to do this response properly.— Preceding unsigned comment added by BobMcK (talk • contribs) 14:30, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Please read WP:TALK to learn about talk pages and WP:BRD to learn about dispute resolution. The blue links above are also worth your time. The long and short is, when editors disagree we discuss the matter on the article's talk page rather than go back and forth with edit summaries. It is perfectly fine to take issue with article wording or have a dispute with a source. Endless reversions don't help establish consensus. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:14, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. This is what I get for trying to put things together before reading the instructions! BobMcK (talk) 14:56, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm told it was easier to edit 15 years ago. Since then, we get presented with situations which end up with new rules. Feel free if you have questions. Also, policies are stuff you have to follow. Guidelines are rules we as as a community all agree should be followed. There are also many essays written by Wikipedians, many of which contradict others, about which we have differing degrees of acceptance. I don't use WP:IAR but many do. Good luck. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:05, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for the generous offer! If I get stuck, I'll take you up on that. I love Wikipedia and am fully committed to respecting it BobMcK (talk) 19:37, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]