User talk:78.55.251.135

November 2017
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Var (department). 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.

Please discuss your issues about all these (Department) articles with Boomer Vial, rather than just reverting their work. Wavemaster447(Need help? Ask me) 04:31, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Wavemaster447 Thanks, I started a conversation at his talk page, but he he just wrote DENY and deleted parts of my talk. 78.55.251.135 (talk) 04:33, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Need I remind the anonymous editor I'm reverting that I asked them why they, as well as other editors are continually disrupting infobox templates, and they asked for "proof"? Thus the need for WP:DENY. Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 04:35, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Boomer Vial You are a liar. I wrote "Example?" after you claimed "continually disrupting multiple articles". You gave no example where what you claimed occurred. 78.55.251.135 (talk) 04:43, 15 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Dude, to-may-toe, to-mah-toe. You still asked for an example, when I questioned you on why you, as well as other anonymous editors were continually messing with infobox codes. I'm still waiting on that guideline, or consensus you're following. As well as an explanation why other non-related IP editors are doing the same thing. Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 04:50, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You are a liar once again."when I questioned you on why you, as well as other anonymous editors were continually messing with infobox codes." - the stuff in quotes didn't happen. 78.55.251.135 (talk) 04:52, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You mean this never happened? Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 05:06, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * No, I meant "I questioned you on why you, as well as other anonymous editors were continually messing with infobox codes" never happened. 78.55.251.135 (talk) 05:07, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You want to read the revision again? "Any reason why you, as well as other anonymous editors are continually disrupting multiple articles". That is where you called me a liar before, when I misstated what you said with "proof/example". Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 05:08, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 05:32, 15 November 2017 (UTC)