User talk:Rockojr2488

Welcome!

Hello, Rockojr2488, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Paul Gilley. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Drmies (talk) 04:15, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

Hello, I'm Tornado chaser. I noticed that you recently removed content from Paul Gilley 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 the 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. Tornado chaser (talk) 04:16, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Stop deleting content. You may discuss on talk page. If you continue I will block you. Drmies (talk) 04:16, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I did adequately explain everything. Re-read my reasons. Rockojr2488 (talk) 04:17, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I did. That's immaterial. Your deletions are challenged. Find consensus on the talk page. Drmies (talk) 04:18, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) When you delete content and someone puts it back you can't just keep deleting it, instead, you should discuss the issue on the talk page first. Tornado chaser (talk) 04:20, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not credible

Those additions should be challenged. This is re-writing history. Hank has been credited as the sole writers for 70 years! You allow some unreliable source to come forward and change that? Mind you the source admits all evidence is BURNED ! And all who could challenge it are dead. This is disgraceful. No wonder why Wikipedia is not considered a scholarly source. You should ban yourself for allowing this history to be falsely re-written. Rockojr2488 (talk) 04:22, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You should use this page[1] for discussions about what to put in the article. Tornado chaser (talk) 04:24, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, this one, Talk:Paul Gilley. Talk page, Rockojr. Drmies (talk) 04:25, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How about what SHOULDNT be in the article?

How can you allow this? Rockojr2488 (talk) 04:25, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Get this garbage off Wikipedia before people start to believe it

Get this garbage off Wikipedia before people start to believe it Rockojr2488 (talk) 04:30, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

Your recent editing history at I'm So Lonesome I Could Cry 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. Binksternet (talk) 05:08, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See the talk page.

i will not allow American history to be falsely rewritten!. It does not belong on Wikipedia. It needs to be deleted. Rockojr2488 (talk) 05:14, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Last warning. Binksternet, please report to AIV if this blanking of article content continues. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 05:56, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Paul Gilley for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paul Gilley is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Gilley until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Tom Reedy (talk) 02:32, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]