User talk:Piawelde

December 2020

Hello, I'm Girth Summit. I noticed that you recently removed content from Functional medicine without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. GirthSummit _(blether) 13:18, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Functional medicine, you may be blocked from editing. GirthSummit _(blether) 13:27, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Functional medicine 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Alexbrn (talk) 14:07, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some reading

Hi - please read the following:

COI - this gives guidelines for editors who wish to edit in areas where they have a personal connection
WP:V - this is our verifiability policy
WP:RS - this gives guidelines on how to identify reliable sources. See also WP:MEDRS, which is required for biomedical information

You may not make such sweeping changes to an article, especially not when you are basing them on what is obviously not a reliable source. You should discuss your proposed changes with other editors on the article talk page. Best GirthSummit _(blether) 13:30, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Functional medicine) for a period of 24 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 think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. GeneralNotability (talk) 14:14, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]