User talk:Alolyphant

Welcome!


Hello, Alolyphant, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The Wikipedia Adventure (a fun interactive editing tutorial that takes about an hour)
 * Wikipedia Teahouse (a user-friendly help forum)
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, or you can  to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! We are so glad you are here! Jim1138 (talk) 04:21, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

You are putting inaccurate information on the pages. I have checked many of the cited references you are using and they do not mention any of the claims you are making on the page. You seem to have a personal investment in this. Much of the information you have added to these pages have nothing to do with the title of the page. Alolyphant (talk) 04:16, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I have zero personal investment in Pedee people, except wanting accurate information, which I am compiling. Yuchitown (talk) 04:52, 12 August 2016 (UTC)Yuchitown

I am willing to work with you to get accurate and relevant information on the page. I am not trying to start an edit war or cause any problems for anyone. (Alolyphant (talk) 05:06, 12 August 2016 (UTC))

Dispute resolution
See wp:Dispute resolution Please avoid wp:edit warring it could result in a wp:block Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 04:20, 12 August 2016 (UTC) Also see wp:ping Jim1138 (talk) 04:21, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, this isn't normal edit warring. While I'm trying to compile cited information to replace the uncited sections (which I will save and post at later time, since there's no point right now), this user has made more than 30+ edits in the space of 15 minutes—much of which are undoing and redoing her/his own revisions. I've never witnessed anything like this before. Yuchitown (talk) 04:51, 12 August 2016 (UTC)Yuchitown

Hello, I am simply trying to get the page back to where it was before either one of us edited it, even though my edits were accurate and correct. He seems to be putting inaccurate information on the page intentionally. (Alolyphant (talk) 04:57, 12 August 2016 (UTC))

I am more than willing to come to a consensus but he doesn't seem interested. I'm not sure what to do. (Alolyphant (talk) 05:03, 12 August 2016 (UTC))

Why did you allow for his inaccurate and biased edits to be put back up on the page? Much of what he has put up is simply untrue and without any factual merit. (Alolyphant (talk) 05:11, 12 August 2016 (UTC)) Much of his edits are poorly sourced (if at all). I thought that Wikipedia was wanting to do more to have informative articles, based on facts rather than biased information. (Alolyphant (talk) 05:50, 12 August 2016 (UTC))

Edit warring notice
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Pee Dee people. 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. Jim1138 (talk) 04:54, 12 August 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.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at State recognized tribes in the United States. Jim1138 (talk) 04:57, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016
Please stop. Wikipedia is not censored. Any further changes which censor an article, such as you did to Pee Dee people, will be regarded as vandalism. If you continue in this manner, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Pee Dee people, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you.

{ Your recent editing history at Pee Dee people 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 article's 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.. August 12 marked over 29 reverts. Yuchitown (talk) 20:55, 13 August 2016 (UTC)Yuchitown

Yuchitown I am simply trying to undo the puzzling biased postings that you have placed on the page. Many of the sentences you placed on the page do not have credible sources and your word choice is quite peculiar. You perhaps seem to have a vested interest in trying to portray the Pee Dee people in a negative way rather than simply posting facts. I encourage you to please stop making unsubstantiated postings on the Pee Dee People page. Wikipedia is about posting facts and letting people interpret the information for themselves. Adding personal slants to sentences and articles is in clear violation of Wikipedia's editing policy. Regards Alolyphant (talk) 04:50, 15 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Alolyphant, the way to handle a dispute is not to remove sourced material, but rather to discuss specific changes at the article talk page and back up your assertions with reliable source material. Edit-warring is not the way to do things.

This is the only warning you will receive about ownership of articles. The next time you continue to disruptively edit Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ''In going over your edits, and your explanations of them here and in your edit summaries, you seem to be saying that the rules don't apply to you. I'm not sure why you seem to believe this, but there are no exceptions to the rules. Thank you for taking a break or, hopefully, stopping your edit-warring. I encourage the other editors who have engaged here and on the articles to fix the massive changes this editor attempted and, Alolyphant, you need to let them edit. Wikipedia does not belong to any one person. You are only one editor and must not violate 3RR. For any further changes you wish to make to these heritage group and state tribe articles, you must first reach consensus on the talk page. If you edit war again you will be blocked as a WP:SPA who is WP:NOTHERE to build the encyclopedia. Thank you. - Co rb ie V    ☊ ☼ 20:12, 16 August 2016 (UTC)''

Block
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block 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. Pigman ☿/talk 00:22, 17 August 2016 (UTC)