User talk:Hotpass105

Welcome!

Hello, Hotpass105, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to Religious male circumcision does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Jayjg ^(talk) 18:56, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

————————

Hi Jayjg,

I am sorry you have this impression of my work. Please cite and explain where/how my contributions violate this rule. I would appreciate you using my most recent edited version, as I have continue to make refinements to my own work.

Thanks, Hotpass105 (talk) Dayton C.

Hotpass, you've just started editing with this account, and have started in a contentious area. One of the articles in particular is a well developed article with "Good Article" status, so there is certainly no pressing need to immediately "fix" it and insert material into it. It is also a medical article, and medical articles on Wikipedia have even stricter sourcing requirements than most other articles. I would strongly recommend that, rather than edit-warring with other editors on these articles, you discuss proposed edits on the article talk pages, and come to agreement first, before attempting to insert text into the articles themselves. Also, when editing talk pages, the convention is to insert a colon before your text (and subsequently two colons, three colons) etc., and not to insert any blank lines. This makes the conversation much easier to read and follow. See WP:THREAD. Jayjg ^(talk) 13:15, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

Your recent editing history at Religious male circumcision 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. Jayjg ^(talk) 19:01, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Circumcision; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that 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. Alexbrn (talk) 11:54, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2019

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Circumcision. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Best not to add original research which incorrectly claims to be supported by a source which it doesn't cite. Alexbrn (talk) 11:36, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Remember that when adding content about health, please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations. (There are several kinds of sources that discuss health: here is how the community classifies them and uses them.) WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a built-in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN.

While editing any article or a wikipage, on the top of the edit window you will see a toolbar which has a button "Cite" click on it
Then click on "Automatic" or "Manual"
For Manual: Choose the most appropriate template and fill in the details, then click "Insert"
For Automatic: Paste the URL or PMID/PMC and click "Generate" and if the article is available on PubMed Central, Citoid will populate a citation which can be inserted by clicking "Insert"

We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:00, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alexbrn wants List of countries by prevalence of genital cutting renamed and dismembered

Thought it might interest you: Talk:List_of_countries_by_prevalence_of_genital_cutting#Requested_move_18_October_2019 Guarapiranga (talk) 09:31, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CANVASSING is a bad idea. Alexbrn (talk) 09:38, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor who may wish to draw a wider range of informed, but uninvolved, editors to a discussion can place a message at any of the following: …
On the user talk pages of concerned editors. Examples include:
• Editors who have made substantial edits to the topic or article
• Editors who have participated in previous discussions on the same topic (or closely related topics)

@Alexbrn: do you ever read the policy links you post? Guarapiranga (talk) 12:14, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and it's obvious you're just contacting the WP:SPA who agreed with you at AN3, with a non-neutral notification to boot. Other editors who have edited the topic, you did not ping. This is blatant canvassing. Alexbrn (talk) 12:32, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Circumcision; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that 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. Alexbrn (talk) 16:23, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

~Swarm~ ^{sting} 05:27, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]