User talk:Therealkagome

Murder of Larry King

Your recent bold edit has been reverted. Per the bold, revert, discuss cycle, after a bold edit is reverted, the status quo should remain while a discussion is started instead of edit-warring, and the dispute should be resolved before reinstating the edit, after a needed consensus is formed to keep it or an alternate version. Fettlemap (talk) 15:41, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

February 2022

Your recent editing history at Murder of Larry King 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.
I appreciate the strength of feelings about the issue of King's gender/sexuality but tit-for-tat editing is not the way to sort it. The issue has been discussed more than once on the talk page and I urge you to reopen that discussion. Please quote sources, rather than feelings, that support your point of view. Nthep (talk) 16:19, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

They aren’t my feelings when it is public knowledge, even published books expressing that Latisha is her CHOSEN name which is said by actual friends of hers as well. she identified as a trans girl. Therealkagome (talk) 16:25, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Then take those sources to the article talk page and make the case there. Your edits, so far, were all unsourced ("It's common knowledge" doesn't wash, you need to quote your sources) and here where there has been quite a lot of previous discussion about this issue makes it even more important that you quote sources and get the consensus of others that they agree with you. Nthep (talk) 16:32, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

people have been correcting and editing this article for years, providing RELIABLE sources saying the same thing over and over on the talk page that has been ignored since 2017. Latisha identified as a trans girl and you’re being willfully ignorant and purposely disrespectful to continuously misgender her while also using her deadname. Therealkagome (talk) 16:43, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

I'll say it again, take it to the talk page. If you can demonstrate that Latisha identified as trans then policy (the first paragraph of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography#Gender identity) does appear to support your viewpoint, but you have to establish it by reference to sources and not by repeating "it's common knowledge". Wikipedia works on consensus not demands. Steaming-in demanding change claiming there is wilful ignorance and purposeful disrespect is not going to win people over. I appreciate that you have strong feelings about this but you have to work with people. List your sources; be specific about where in those sources Latisha identified as trans, show that these sources have previously been overlooked and/or are new since the topic was last discussed, and be prepared to refute opposing viewpoints but by example not demand. I'd suggest a read of Wikipedia:Reliable sources so you understand what sort of sources are looked for. Nthep (talk) 17:18, 10 February 2022 (UTC)