User talk:MysticCipher87(alt-account)

2025 Mexico NASCAR Races

Hello Mystic! I left a message about the mexico nascar races on your main account! Hope to hear from you soon!! 45BearsFan (talk) 16:06, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of content for race sections on racetracks?

Why make the changes? They tell vital information about how the tracks got their respective races and how the events have changed over time. It feels unnecessary to remove that much information. Cheers! Nascar9919 (he/him • t • c) 23:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MysticCipher87(alt-account): I think it's best if we take this to WP:MOTORSPORTS to discuss; it feels like you're taking out too much content that is vital for the article. Cheers! Nascar9919 (he/him • t • c) 23:18, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nascar9919: Sorry, but what exactly is the content in your reverts that was "vital"? I agree with MysticCipher's edits here; the articles are too long and need to be trimmed, and removing content that isn't given due WP:WEIGHT in sources and/or is covered elsewhere is a good start. Please also remember WP:ONUS; if content is removed it is the responsibility of anyone wanting to restore the content to seek consensus to do so. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 13:44, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GhostOfDanGurney: Started up a discussion on WP:MOTORSPORTS. Trying to come to a consensus on what we should include. Please input your opinions on the matter when you get the chance. Thanks! Cheers! Nascar9919 (he/him • t • c) 23:03, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MysticCipher87(alt-account): And now, why trim the lead for articles? They're a summary of the history and the layouts/amenities of the facility. You're removing way too much in my opinion. Cheers! Nascar9919 (he/him • t • c) 22:35, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MysticCipher87(alt-account): Started up a discussion on WP:MOTORSPORTS to see if we can come to a compromise with consensus. For now, please stop with the trimming of leads; I understand the events, but the leads feel highly unnecessary. When you can, I'd like to hear an explanation of why the leads and events section should be shortened other than just saying it in the explanation box. There needs to be a reason; do you think a certain section over-explains something? What can be shorter? Having a non-specific explanation feels like we're going nowhere. You've been active all this time reverting and making sweeping edits without giving any sort of opinion or starting any sort of discussion; it's been borderline, if not disruptive for the pages. Please elaborate when you get the chance either in here or WP:MOTORSPORTS and I or another person be happy to talk this out with you. Thanks. Cheers! Nascar9919 (he/him • t • c) 22:53, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2024

Hello, I'm Glman. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. glman (talk) 21:18, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on JTG Daughtery Racing. 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. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 13:43, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history 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; read about 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. glman (talk) 14:28, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:MysticCipher87(alt-account) reported by User:GhostOfDanGurney (Result: ). Thank you. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 14:19, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Per a complaint at the noticeboard. Both edit warring and move warring. EdJohnston (talk) 19:32, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]