User talk:116.89.65.85

June 2022
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Certificate of Entitlement, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 05:12, 1 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Pls explain why my edit was factually incorrect. 116.89.65.85 (talk) 05:17, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Greenwashing. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 05:13, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.


 * Pls explain why my edit was factually incorrect 116.89.65.85 (talk) 05:18, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Your additions contains several sources relating to subsidies given to taxis and car-sharing programmes etc. There is no mention of green-washing, increase of carbon footprint etc which you claimed in your edits. Please note that Wikipedia does not allow allow original research, please read No original research. Also, please do not use Wikipedia as a place to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. Thanks -- Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 05:22, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Based on the article: https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/private-hire-cars-driving-up-petrol-consumption-in-singapore-say-experts
 * it links the increase in petrol consumption, despite lower vehicle population to the PHVs. It is well understood that burning of petrol leads to greater carbon emissions (or do I have to cite a source for that too?) Happy to limit my edit to the above + subsidies that you mentioned. 116.89.65.85 (talk) 05:30, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * It will still be considered original research as there is no mention of greenwashing or equivalent, the point that you are trying to make now. While it is known more petrol burning leads to more carbon emission, does LTA subsidising petrol costs for them means LTA is greenwashing? LTA subsidising them is about trying to make it affordable for such operators to continue their operations and not about their products, aims and policies are environmentally friendly (definition from Greenwashing). Your edit, claiming that by doing this, is termed greenwashing is what wikipedia called WP:SYNTHESIS, combining various sources and imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any source. As Wikipedia needs reliable sources for claims, a direct source saying LTA is greenwashing will be much better. If you have to combine various sources and come to your own conclusion (not by the sources), it is unacceptable by Wikipedia's standards. -- Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 06:15, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your feedback. I've removed references to greenwashing and anything not explicitly cited by the sources 116.89.65.85 (talk) 06:20, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

3RR notification
Your recent editing history at Certificate of Entitlement shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you being blocked from editing&mdash;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&mdash;even if you do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.


 * Hello IP 116.89.65.85, this notification is to inform you of the three-revert rule, which both you and Justanothersgwikieditor are at. Any further reverts would likely lead to a block. Instead of that, please do discuss the content dispute at Talk:Certificate of Entitlement. Thanks. Seloloving (talk) 08:12, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hello, and thank you for lending your time to help improve Wikipedia! If you are interested in editing more often, I suggest you create an account to gain additional privileges. Happy editing! Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 06:15, 1 June 2022 (UTC)