User talk:Carrie Lou's Granddaughter

Welcome!
Hello, Carrie Lou&#39;s Granddaughter, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or. Again, welcome. Doug Weller talk 08:00, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hello, Carrie Lou&#39;s Granddaughter, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to United Daughters of the Confederacy does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Questions page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  23:53, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

June 2019
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at H. K. Edgerton. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 02:04, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

The page for Mr. Edgarton is blatantly false. It very irresponsible to publish such slander. Carrie Lou&#39;s Granddaughter (talk) 15:28, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Sep 2020
Once an edit of yours has been undone you take it to talk page, you do not continue to revert (see Slatersteven (talk) 15:20, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.Slatersteven (talk) 15:22, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Also wp:spa might be worth a read.Slatersteven (talk) 15:25, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

The majority of the description of the page is false and can he proven with official minutes of the meetings available for viewing of the 125 year history of the organization. The false narrative of the organization is very irresponsible editing. Carrie Lou&#39;s Granddaughter (talk) 15:26, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Then make a case at the talk page and get wp:consensus as the wp:ONUS is on you. read wp:editwar, being right is not one of the exceptions (in fact it says ""But my edits were right, so it wasn't edit warring" is no defense."). IN fact I suggest you read it very very carefully.Slatersteven (talk) 15:30, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Important Notice
Doug Weller talk 16:00, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

They are false. Based on opinion books Carrie Lou&#39;s Granddaughter (talk) 16:49, 1 October 2020 (UTC)