This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Itanaman (talk | contribs) at 22:25, 3 September 2015 (Editor Fyunck is in fact engaged in Edit warring and disruption of continuity on Denali Page). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 22:25, 3 September 2015 by Itanaman (talk | contribs) (Editor Fyunck is in fact engaged in Edit warring and disruption of continuity on Denali Page)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Your recent editing history at Denali 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 get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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.
- You have reverted an article 4x in a 24 hour period. Two editors disagree on your interpretation. You WILL be blocked for the 4x revert if an administrator sees it unless you revert it back yourself. See WP:3RR. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:11, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
First off, I reverted after you reverted my edits 3 times, meaning you first violated that policy. Second, you have not gone to the talk page as requested. Third and finally, "under former known as, or also known as" the final unanimous decision was to have it as I put it back to in the first place. This should never have made it here, you should have come to the talk page in the section to discuss it further with us. Please do so before continuing your rant. Thank you.