User talk:Descartes16
Edit warring
[edit]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. 808 AD (talk) 14:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Are you kidding me ?
- You are the one you keeps pushing non reliable sources to link Morroco to the Emir. Come and talk in the talk page but you cannot do what you want without credible sources. Descartes16 (talk) 14:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Encyclopaedia of Islam and Larousse are both reliable sources. You can open a new section there and explain why you think that the sources are unreliable. 808 AD (talk) 15:11, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Again, I don't have to open a new section as you are the one who wanted to add this very non consensual wording to the article, open a new section and I will be happy to participate. Descartes16 (talk) 15:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- You're the only one questioning the reliability of the sources, so you need to elaborate. Claiming they are unreliable without evidence is disruptive. 808 AD (talk) 15:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not the only one since you had a similar issue with @M.Bitton. Descartes16 (talk) 15:31, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- You're the only one questioning the reliability of the sources, so you need to elaborate. Claiming they are unreliable without evidence is disruptive. 808 AD (talk) 15:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Again, I don't have to open a new section as you are the one who wanted to add this very non consensual wording to the article, open a new section and I will be happy to participate. Descartes16 (talk) 15:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Encyclopaedia of Islam and Larousse are both reliable sources. You can open a new section there and explain why you think that the sources are unreliable. 808 AD (talk) 15:11, 28 May 2024 (UTC)