| Revision as of 21:36, 13 June 2018 editCorkythehornetfan (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, New page reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors105,370 edits →June 2018← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:06, 13 June 2018 edit undoUW Dawgs (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers57,387 edits →June 2018: reNext edit → | ||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
| '''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.{{Break}}'' You have now violated 3RR. Further revert will result in a block.''<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> ] 21:32, 13 June 2018 (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.{{Break}}'' You have now violated 3RR. Further revert will result in a block.''<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> ] 21:32, 13 June 2018 (UTC) | ||
| :Per ], you are suppose to discuss instead of reverting and getting yourself into an edit war, which may result in a block. Further reverts will result in you being taken to a notice board. I'm done reverting and playing your childish games. If the other user who reverted you first doesn't want to discuss, than that is on them. But I have stated my issues with your edits. ] 21:36, 13 June 2018 (UTC) | :Per ], you are suppose to discuss instead of reverting and getting yourself into an edit war, which may result in a block. Further reverts will result in you being taken to a notice board. I'm done reverting and playing your childish games. If the other user who reverted you first doesn't want to discuss, than that is on them. But I have stated my issues with your edits. ] 21:36, 13 June 2018 (UTC) | ||
| : Comment - Editor has been made aware of the CFB project-wide naming convention including via a link to ] allowing them to confirm the convention to their satisfaction. | |||
| : Editor has stated, but to date has not supported in any manner, that "era" is inappropriate for brief (my word choice) tenures and periods. If so, there is a project-wide issue to resolve which is not specific to this particular article. A glance at Merriam-Webster seems to contradict this claim, but it's impossible to refute an argument not yet offered. ] (]) 22:05, 13 June 2018 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 22:06, 13 June 2018
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, MHS1976. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, MHS1976. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
June 2018
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Western Kentucky Hilltoppers football. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring states:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Corky 20:59, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Western Kentucky Hilltoppers football 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.
You have now violated 3RR. Further revert will result in a block. Corky 21:32, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Per WP:BRD, you are suppose to discuss instead of reverting and getting yourself into an edit war, which may result in a block. Further reverts will result in you being taken to a notice board. I'm done reverting and playing your childish games. If the other user who reverted you first doesn't want to discuss, than that is on them. But I have stated my issues with your edits. Corky 21:36, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Comment - Editor has been made aware of the CFB project-wide naming convention including via a link to List of NCAA Division I FBS football programs allowing them to confirm the convention to their satisfaction.
- Editor has stated, but to date has not supported in any manner, that "era" is inappropriate for brief (my word choice) tenures and periods. If so, there is a project-wide issue to resolve which is not specific to this particular article. A glance at Merriam-Webster seems to contradict this claim, but it's impossible to refute an argument not yet offered. UW Dawgs (talk) 22:05, 13 June 2018 (UTC)