| Revision as of 01:13, 2 August 2010 edit92.10.208.209 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:10, 2 August 2010 edit undoWeaponbb7 (talk | contribs)4,369 edits adding Uw-3RRNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ] Please do not assume ]. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-own2 --> ] (]) 00:39, 2 August 2010 (UTC) | ] Please do not assume ]. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-own2 --> ] (]) 00:39, 2 August 2010 (UTC) | ||
| :: What are you talking about? I did allow Albanman to change and shorten significantly the section, and to move it to another place. I only cannot agree to edits based on lies. There is nothing wrong in reverting vandalisms of others. | :: What are you talking about? I did allow Albanman to change and shorten significantly the section, and to move it to another place. I only cannot agree to edits based on lies. There is nothing wrong in reverting vandalisms of others. | ||
| ] You currently appear to be engaged in an ''']'''  according to the reverts you have made on ]. Note that the ] prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the ]. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to ] to work towards wording and content that gains a ] among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek ], and in some cases it may be appropriate to request ]. If the edit warring continues, '''you may be ] from editing''' without further notice. <!-- Template:uw-3rr --> ] (]) 04:10, 2 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 04:10, 2 August 2010
Please do not assume ownership of articles. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you. TEDickey (talk) 00:39, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
- What are you talking about? I did allow Albanman to change and shorten significantly the section, and to move it to another place. I only cannot agree to edits based on lies. There is nothing wrong in reverting vandalisms of others.
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Amish. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Weaponbb7 (talk) 04:10, 2 August 2010 (UTC)