User talk:156.57.11.183

December 2023
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. 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. Bbb23 (talk) 23:47, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. - FlightTime  ( open channel ) 00:11, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Article Talk Pages
I don't feel like things were explained in adequate detail and I want you to know your concerns are heard. When @FlightTime mentioned the talk page they were referring to the article talk page. In this case it would be Talk:Randy Rhoads. This is where you should go to start a discussion about the edits in question. Their note worthiness is in question so you may want to to read WP:DUE. It is not necessary, nor is it encouraged, to include every minute detail about a subject. However, consensus rules on Wikipedia and may go for or against your point of view. You are the one wanting to include content so the onus (WP:ONUS) is on you to gain consensus.

As an editor here I have many opinions about how we should conduct ourselves as members of this community. I am not an admin and have no authority except that which is given to every good faith community member to challenge the actions of others with reasoned indifference to any particular point of view. As such, you both are engaged in an edit war and should cease, immediately, to edit this particular content in the article without gaining consensus first and I think it inappropriate for you to receive warnings alone and even less appropriate to receive said warnings from the opposite party in the edit war. It is my opinion the only possible result one can hope to gain from this is a chilling affect on the collaboration process. It is also inappropriate, in my opinion, for an admin to not adequately explain why they would revert your filed report and would simply deem it as "disruptive" in a templated warning message while allowing another user to effectively revenge file a report, even if done correctly and even if the result did not end in admin action, without a warning. -- A Rose Wolf  13:59, 27 December 2023 (UTC)