| Revision as of 00:33, 29 November 2016 editBradv (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators37,843 edits Warning: Three-revert rule on Organizational behavior. (TW)← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:08, 29 November 2016 edit undoHappydaise (talk | contribs)121 edits →November 2016Next edit → | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
| '''Being involved in an edit war can result in your being ]'''—especially if you violate the ], which states that an editor must not perform more than three ] 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.<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> ] 00:33, 29 November 2016 (UTC) | '''Being involved in an edit war can result in your being ]'''—especially if you violate the ], which states that an editor must not perform more than three ] 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.<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> ] 00:33, 29 November 2016 (UTC) | ||
| :Yes i noticed that despite an open-ended dispute resolution process is still underway this other person decided to change the article text under dispute. I decided not to change their edit. however i hope that someone may see that they did this- all the while a dispute resolution is on-going. Do you suggest listing this as edit warring on the noticeboard. Which notice-board if so?] (]) 01:08, 29 November 2016 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:08, 29 November 2016
Happydaise, you are invited to the Teahouse!
|
Hi Happydaise! Thanks for contributing to Misplaced Pages. Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:09, 15 November 2016 (UTC) |
November 2016
Your recent editing history at Organizational behavior shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 your 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. Bradv 00:33, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
- Yes i noticed that despite an open-ended dispute resolution process is still underway this other person decided to change the article text under dispute. I decided not to change their edit. however i hope that someone may see that they did this- all the while a dispute resolution is on-going. Do you suggest listing this as edit warring on the noticeboard. Which notice-board if so?Happydaise (talk) 01:08, 29 November 2016 (UTC)