User talk:Dd88 reformed

December 2020
Your recent editing history at Census of Quirinius 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.  Acroterion   (talk)   19:44, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, you may be blocked from editing.  Acroterion   (talk)   19:46, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

I don’t know if you read what I wrote or not. But the article was false and leans heavily bias for atheists. I can oblige to remove my own personal slant against atheism, as I only did this to counter the obviously false information that is written in the article to favor atheism. But the page needs to be edited as it is currently completely objectively false. The information written prior to my edits was propagated by subjective opinion and not grounded in truth. Dd88 reformed (talk) 19:57, 16 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Hardly truth. "Atheists tend to make up contradictions in their own minds with zero basis, in order to discredit Scripture." is something you've made up, for instance. It's original research. We rely on sources meeting WP:RS and with religious texts we do not use them to make an argument but rely upon scholarly sources. And if you think the scripture of your religion is infallible, perhaps you shouldn't be editing articles about it. Wikipedia cannot accept that any scripture is infallible, see WP:NPOV. And I suspect that most Christians don't think scripture is infallible. Many Christians accept evolution, for example Doug Weller  talk 17:32, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Era styles
We can't choose our preferences, we need to follow WP:ERA. Doug Weller talk 18:07, 17 December 2020 (UTC)