User talk:63.143.198.26

December 2016
Hello, I'm Utcursch. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Political appointments of Donald Trump seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. utcursch &#124; talk 01:46, 21 December 2016 (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.


 * Please stop POV-pushing. Wikipedia is not a place to spread anti- or pro-Trump propaganda. See WP:BRD: If someone reverts your additions, take your concerns to the talk page. utcursch &#124; talk 01:49, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. ''Have a look at WP:BRD, if you haven't already. Please take your concerns to the talk page.'' utcursch &#124; talk 01:54, 21 December 2016 (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.

Please stop wiki-stalking me. This is harassment.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Political appointments of Donald Trump. 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 lose editing privileges. 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 loss of editing privileges. Thank you. utcursch &#124; talk 02:00, 21 December 2016 (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.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Political appointments of Donald Trump. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.Please learn to use the talk page per WP:BRD. utcursch &#124; talk 02:04, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
 * 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.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. utcursch &#124; talk 02:05, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

Isn't what you are doing also edit-warring? WP: Boomerang Aren't you also in violation of WP:INVOLVED? I should have you stripped of your post.63.143.198.26 (talk) 02:07, 21 December 2016 (UTC)


 * See BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, which you've been told about more than once. I don't edit Donald Trump-related articles, and I've little interest in the US politics. I came across your edits from 63.143.204.14, while patrolling changes (undone by JFG). My only concern is your repeated POV-pushing and refusal to take your concerns to the talk page. utcursch &#124; talk 02:11, 21 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Tell me, do you believe your own lies? There was nothing controversial about my edits; you were the lone objector to them. I was stating plain, well-referenced facts. What has happened to the Truth?63.143.198.26 (talk) 02:13, 21 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Your edits at Special:Contributions/63.143.204.145 were undone by others. And no, they were not "well-referenced". Everyone believes that their view is the "truth". That's why we have WP:BRD guideline: if someone reverts your edits, you talk it to the talk page for discussion. If you refuse to your talk page, and continue to treat Wikipedia as a battleground, this is not the place for you. utcursch &#124; talk 02:23, 21 December 2016 (UTC)