| Revision as of 21:58, 17 January 2010 editNimbusWeb (talk | contribs)1,727 edits →General comment← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:02, 17 January 2010 edit undoRavensfire (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers89,197 edits →General commentNext edit → | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| I did take it to the talk page. Please have a look at the ] talk page. All I am trying to do is stop editors who are removing multiple fully referenced sentences despite no consensus having been reached on the talk page. Because there are two of them and they are obviously higher up in the editorial pecking order my view is not considered as important as theirs.] (]) 21:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC) | I did take it to the talk page. Please have a look at the ] talk page. All I am trying to do is stop editors who are removing multiple fully referenced sentences despite no consensus having been reached on the talk page. Because there are two of them and they are obviously higher up in the editorial pecking order my view is not considered as important as theirs.] (]) 21:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
| : I saw it, and I don't see consensus for your changes from that. Right or wrong, Misplaced Pages articles are group-based, material has to be acceptable by a consensus of the editors. If you keep reverting as you're doing, you'll going to end up blocked. Just trying to make you aware of what can happen. It's possible for both sides in a war to get blocked, especially in a article on some form of probation, but if there's just one person on one side, and multiple on the other, it's usually going to be just that one person. <b><font color="darkred">]</font></b> <font color="black">(])</font> 22:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 22:02, 17 January 2010
Hi. This is my talk page.NimbusWeb (talk) 12:20, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
General comment
You may want to read the WP:BRD policy article. One of the key parts is that when a change is reverted it is taken to the talk page, not continually readded. When that happens, you start an edit war, which rarely ends well. Your path right now is heading towards a block for edit-warring - please consider reviewing how you edit. Ravensfire (talk) 21:52, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
I did take it to the talk page. Please have a look at the Biosequestration talk page. All I am trying to do is stop editors who are removing multiple fully referenced sentences despite no consensus having been reached on the talk page. Because there are two of them and they are obviously higher up in the editorial pecking order my view is not considered as important as theirs.NimbusWeb (talk) 21:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- I saw it, and I don't see consensus for your changes from that. Right or wrong, Misplaced Pages articles are group-based, material has to be acceptable by a consensus of the editors. If you keep reverting as you're doing, you'll going to end up blocked. Just trying to make you aware of what can happen. It's possible for both sides in a war to get blocked, especially in a article on some form of probation, but if there's just one person on one side, and multiple on the other, it's usually going to be just that one person. Ravensfire (talk) 22:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)