User talk:210.10.203.194

January 2018
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Ancient astronauts. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 01:43, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Ancient astronauts 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&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 don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. LuckyLouie (talk) 02:49, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello! Sorry that I've reverted you more than once--and I'm not the template leaver, just for the record. As I tried to get across, while your contributions are appreciated, you're making one logical leap too many. Sitchin proposed concept X; here's some evidence of concept X, ergo, there's evidence of Sitchin. That's all well and good in every day conversation, of course. But on Wikipedia, we look for a source that makes that link explicitly, otherwise, there's a lot of room for error in that proposed syllogism. I'd highly recommend going to the article talk page and hashing it out. You never know, you might convince people! Thank you. Dumuzid (talk) 02:56, 3 January 2018 (UTC)