User talk:Boorif4747

It's a bad idea to use the Daily Mail as a source
Please be advised that tabloid newspapers such as the Daily Mail are considered potentially unreliable sources and should be avoided. The decision about the Daily Mail came after a request for comments from the community. Please cite sources other than the Daily Mail for the material in the USSF article. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 22:13, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

July 2018
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on United States Space Force. 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.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and 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. Garuda28 (talk) 22:36, 19 July 2018 (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.

WP:BRD
If you wish to be a effective contributor to Wikipedia, you should familiarize yourself with WP:BRD. It goes like this: an editor makes and edit, another editor disagrees and reverts it, the editor who made it goes to talk to get a consensus and discuss. You do this, and you will go far. If you refuse to engage in discussions it is unlikely that the changes you seek will be implemented. Garuda28 (talk) 22:30, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Three Revert Rule
Your recent editing history at United States Space Force 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.Garuda28 (talk) 22:36, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. G M G talk  22:44, 19 July 2018 (UTC)