User talk:Sallgeud

June 2017

Hello. Your recent edit to List of GRC Software appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person or organization added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 17:50, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Sallgeud Please review WP:COI and Wikipedia:Notability#Stand-alone_lists. Including ELs in lists like this or in the bodies of articles violates MOS among other things. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 18:36, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Chrissymad Reviewed. All the companies on the list are notable for their substantial use for precisely the topic listed. Every one of those pieces of software has Fortune 500 customers and substantial user bases. My consulting team is working on sourcing content so that those (~6 of them) that do not have Wikipedia entries soon will. If you think one specific one is non-notable, please provide evidence of such. I can point to customer bases on each of these that are significant. That customer base would make them all relevant in a "List of GRC Software". I would agree to delete the list entirely, or removing any individual members of the list to which you think should be removed, and for which I cannot provide evidence of high quality enterprise customers.

Sallgeud If you think one specific one is non-notable, please provide evidence of such. - you misunderstand Wikipedia. The onus is on you. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:05, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Regarding your edit summary: "Unless you're willing to suggest reasons for why each / any of these be removed, please stop modifying to the original. Those added are all valid and notable." We've been giving you reasons in edit summaries and here on your talk page, but you don't appear to be listening. Waggie (talk) 19:08, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at List of GRC Software 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. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:38, 21 June 2017 (UTC)