This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Malik Shabazz (talk | contribs) at 15:12, 29 March 2012 (Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Nation of Islam. (TW)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 15:12, 29 March 2012 by Malik Shabazz (talk | contribs) (Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Nation of Islam. (TW))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)OWS Demographics change
Why did you remove conservatives and the reference as undue weight? I read the article and it mentions a conservative teacher. Could you clarify. I lean towards inclusion of that. The reference is valid, reliable and contains the information. What is the undue weight that you see?--Amadscientist (talk) 12:35, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
- Never mind...it is. A google search shows nothing in the form of actual articles and a mention of a single conservative teacher in one is undue weight at this time.--Amadscientist (talk) 12:42, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Update
Sorry about taking the union stuff out. That was not my intention, and I think the article is better now that you re-added the two union edits. Happy editing, 완젬스 (talk) 14:03, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
AN/I
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --OpenFuture (talk) 11:09, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
- Related to the above message; please respect your other editors and leave an edit summary. It doesn't have to be long - it can be anything as short as "reply", "note" or "comment" on a talk page - but try to make it descriptive (i.e. "adding source", "changing wording", etc). Thank you, m.o.p 11:32, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Gold Standard IP
I've asked Ed to take a look at the new IP address our friend is using now and to block it for evasion. No reason to do anything until then as they'll just keep pushing their POV. I did chuckle at their first post (Oh, look, I'm unblocked! Right...). Ravensfire (talk) 03:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Copyeditor's Barnstar |
| Just to let you know that your excellent work at the OWS articles has not gone unnoticed. Gandydancer (talk) 09:50, 3 February 2012 (UTC) |
Crime/Security Concerns/Security
I've brought the discussion back here again. Since you recently editted OWS, I am extending an invite to you.Racingstripes (talk) 04:44, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
March 2012
Your recent editing history at Nation of Islam shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you 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.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 15:12, 29 March 2012 (UTC)