| Revision as of 05:13, 29 October 2017 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,301,101 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Sparkie82/Archive 1) (bot← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:28, 9 November 2017 edit undoDoug Weller (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Oversighters, Administrators264,089 edits Warning: Three-revert rule on Current members of the United States Senate. (TW)Next edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| == Wanted to let you know that I'd retired == | == Wanted to let you know that I'd retired == | ||
| Thank you for earlier affirming interactions. See User:Leprof_7272 page for details if interested. Bonne chance. Le Prof ] (]) 16:09, 24 June 2017 (UTC) | Thank you for earlier affirming interactions. See User:Leprof_7272 page for details if interested. Bonne chance. Le Prof ] (]) 16:09, 24 June 2017 (UTC) | ||
| == November 2017 == | |||
| ] Your recent editing history at ] shows that you are currently engaged in an ]. 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 ] to work toward making a version that represents ] among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See ] for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant ] or seek ]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary ]. | |||
| '''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 --> ] ] 08:28, 9 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 08:28, 9 November 2017
 Archives |
/Archive_1 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present. |
 | Welcome to Sparkie82's talk page. I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your talk page (or the article's talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or let me know where specifically you'd prefer the reply. |
Wanted to let you know that I'd retired
Thank you for earlier affirming interactions. See User:Leprof_7272 page for details if interested. Bonne chance. Le Prof 73.210.155.96 (talk) 16:09, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
November 2017
Your recent editing history at Current members of the United States Senate 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. Doug Weller talk 08:28, 9 November 2017 (UTC)