User talk:2601:196:180:DC0:7C5A:37CB:A8C6:32D7

March 2023
Your recent editing history at Algorithm 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; read about 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.  ArcAngel    (talk) 02:31, 25 March 2023 (UTC)


 * This is piss-posh turned into a tempest. What part of this is not clear to anyone?  Including User:SomeoneIguess, who is the one driving the isssue towards an edit war.  A brand new user (who had made I believe *three edits* in article space) Changed the punctuation of an apparent direct quotation..  We don't even know if the original punctuation is correct.  And nobody is going to go search a Talk page to see if the issue was ever discussed over the history of the article when they feel impelled to make the same change that started all this.  Hence the intratext note first asking for clarification of the correct punctuation, then a simple "stet" to see that it remains that way once verified.  All this is is cyber-bullying hiding behind WP:MOS and jobsworthing. 2601:196:180:DC0:7C5A:37CB:A8C6:32D7 (talk) 02:36, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
 * This is not "cyber-bullying", as you put it. It is a simple warning, nothing more.  Instead of continually reverting, discuss it on the article talk page.     ArcAngel    (talk) 02:40, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry. My grammar evidently was not clear enough.  I was referring to the actions of User:Someoneiguess, not you.  So strike the above, please. 2601:196:180:DC0:7C5A:37CB:A8C6:32D7 (talk) 02:42, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Before I say anything, I will cite WP:NPA - It should be noted that I - kindly - moved your comment after a different editor - a rollbacker, no less - stated as well that the comment should remain within the Talk Page. Someone, i guess(talk i guess&#124;le edit list)  02:40, 25 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Once again, I do not understand what you are saying. Moved what comment where?  Who said what should remain at what Talk page.  Please clarify these.  Thank you.  2601:196:180:DC0:7C5A:37CB:A8C6:32D7 (talk) 02:44, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The characters  refer to an HTML comment - when your edit was reverted, the comment you made was removed as it belongs on the talk page. Additionally, I even took the effort of moving said comment to the Talk Page. The comment should remain within Talk:Algorithm - not Algorithm. It should also be added that, whilst arguing over me reverting your edits - the question you made was already peacefully resolved in said talk page. Someone, i guess(talk i guess&#124;le edit list)  02:48, 25 March 2023 (UTC)