User talk:Lumpish0Enlisted81

August 2023

Hi Mgraminha! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Witchcraft that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Meters (talk) 03:18, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I will revert the change and mark as a non minor change. Mgraminha (talk) 03:20, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted again. This is a contested edit and you need to discuss it on the article's talk page. Meters (talk) 03:25, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be 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 noticeboards.
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. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Stop pushing this POV. These types of edits have been discussed and reverted before (on Witch (word), Witchcraft, and Warlock). It's not up to you to arbitrarily enforce your version or interpretation. Meters (talk) 03:21, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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 noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Witchcraft, you may be blocked from editing. Again, take it to the article's talk page. Per WP:BRD you should discuss a contested edit rather than restoring it. Meters (talk) 03:23, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Meters,

This editing is not intentional, and it was meant to clear misconceptions, not push a POV. As of yet, i am unfamiliar with some tools on Wikipedia. How i may discuss this on talk? Mgraminha (talk) 03:26, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What do you you mean it's "not intentional"? You cannot claim that you accidentally made similar changes to three articles. And yes, you are pushing your WP:POV. You think that the articles contain misconceptions. That's your point of view, and you are rewriting the articles to your view. The issue of the meaning of the terms is already discussed in the articles, and the current content is what various editors have settled on. Again It's not up to you to arbitrarily enforce your version or interpretation.

Each article has an associated talk page where editors can discuss issues and reach a consensus. Meters (talk) 03:33, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Meters,

Thank you for the clarification! Mgraminha (talk) 04:02, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]