User talk:CadoganEligos

January 2015
Hello, I'm MadGuy7023. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Criticism of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. MadGuy7023 (talk) 23:34, 6 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I thought I did explain why. I put my explanation in the edit summary. Does it not appear for you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CadoganEligos (talk • contribs)
 * I just found out that you did explain why you removed it, so I re-removed it. Sorry about that. MadGuy7023 (talk) 23:38, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hello, CadoganEligos, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your recent edit to that is part of the Latter Day Saint movement WikiProject. I regret that some of your edits may have been reverted in order to help maintain a neutral point of view. However, we welcome your contributions and hope that you will stay and contribute more. Here are some links that I found helpful:


 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Introduction to Wikipedia and Tutorial on editing
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Policies and Guidelines
 * Manual of Style
 * Manual of Style (Latter Day Saints)
 * Naming conventions (Latter Day Saints)

Please use article talk pages and the Latter Day Saint movement project talk page to discuss subjects (especially controversial ones) to help reach consensus. When you do, remember to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments.

Be bold, but not reckless, and don't be surprised by the bold, revert, discuss cycle.

And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, check out Questions, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! — Asterisk *  Splat → 18:46, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi CadoganEligos
Hi CadoganEligos, I see that you are a new user of Wikipedia. Although we have disagreed on some edits recently, I wanted to put those disagreements aside and just inform you of something that is important on the administrative side of things. On First Vision, you reverted (or "undid") the same edit of other users a total of four times in less than 24 hours. There is a rule in Wikipedia that is fairly black-and-white, called the three-revert rule, which states: "An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period. An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert. Violations of the rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours."

Because you are a new editor and may not be aware of this rule, I don't think you should be blocked for this violation. I just thought it would be good that you be made aware of it. I don't want to see you get blocked, especially if you don't know about the rule. Thanks for your understanding. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:31, 7 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the head's up. Here is what I don't understand.  I made good faith, and appropriate edits.  You were the one doing the reverting.  In fact, you violated the very rule you've quoted here, didn't you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CadoganEligos (talk • contribs)


 * The rule applies to any reversions except for the reversion of obvious vandalism. Good faith edits can be reverted if users disagree with the change that was made, just so long as they don't keep reverting more than three times on the same article within 24 hours. But no, I didn't violate it: I reverted once on First Vision and twice on Criticism of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. One of the underlying purposes of the rule is to encourage users to discuss things on the article talk page if a change is proving to be controversial. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:56, 8 January 2015 (UTC)