User talk:GoosebumpsArt

Stop adding that Twitter link

I am going to tell you like how me and told theinstanmatrix had already told Goosebumps1Ukfan and NickDummy. Do not edit that Goosebumps page ever again. We will block you if you keep putting that twitter link on this page. That is a rumor and it's is false we only add information from movie websites like IMD. So therefore if you keep adding that Twitter link we of Wikipedia will ban you and those other two users from this website. Ambandicoot (talk) 14:51, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ow. "Do not edit that Goosebumps page ever again" seems unnecessarily harsh. I just wanted to keep the page up-to-date. GoosebumpsArt (talk) 21:48, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Theinstantmatrix Is going to tell you like he told those other users about Twitter

Twitter ain't a reliable source so we will keep removing that name no matter how many times you, NickDummy and Goosebumps1Ukfan keep adding it. Wait until the film is released to add more information that's all we of Wikipedia are trying to say. Ambandicoot (talk) 15:08, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't always true; Twitter can be reliable under certain circumstances. However, I ended up linking to a news article that said roughly the same thing as the tweet, so — hopefully — everyone can be happy. GoosebumpsArt (talk) 21:48, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018

Your recent editing history at Goosebumps 2 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. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:41, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To anyone in the future who reads this, it might be good to have some context: I added a Twitter-reference on an article, but it was removed. I tried to justify my edit, but the link was removed again by the same user. I cited a different source (a news article), but the other user decided to remove that link as well (because he assumed that I had linked to the tweet again, even though I didn't). Hopefully that clears thing up. Sorry for using multiple undos in a day! GoosebumpsArt (talk) 21:48, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GoosebumpsArt, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi GoosebumpsArt! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cullen328 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 2 August 2018 (UTC)