User talk:Ghgfrujbftjtf

November 2021
Hello, I'm Trainsandotherthings. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Dolley Madison seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:08, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Please identify what portion of the edits was factually untrue. Ghgfrujbftjtf (talk) 02:20, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Dolley Madison, you may be blocked from editing. -- ferret (talk) 16:37, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Update Nov 28 2021: After working with "Trainsandotherthings", a revision was created that was appropriate and subsequently approved. Yet, due to what seems to be a systems and/or computer issue - that approved edit was not loading correctly. Only two sentences were changed. But prior to re-submitting, I did re-verify with "Trainsandotherthings" via their talk page that the changes were ok and they indicated that they did not revert them again.

This repetitive system behavior likely garnering the response from "ferret" above. That user advised that the edits approved by "Trainsandotherthings" were in fact not approved, and that to make any changes to the Dolley Madison page - I needed to, "Use the article's talk page to discuss the changes you want, why, and what sourcing backs the new language you propose". I have therefore re-suggested those prior approved changes on that talk page, as directed.

The edits in question are to identify enslaved persons referenced in the article as "enslaved people" instead of "slaves," which is a term used to dehumanize and commodify the individuals it refers to. This term change, however, is garnering unusual (and extensive) opposition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghgfrujbftjtf (talk • contribs) 00:25, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * To clarify my involvement, I initially reverted an edit by Ghgfrujbftjtf that was very non-neutral. They then reworked the edit in a manner that I personally thought was an improvement, but I am not in charge of the article, nor is any other individual editor. Any editor can revert or contest a change to an article, and in most cases the solution is to discuss the edit on the article talk page and attempt to reach a consensus. I don't have a strong opinion on the changes being discussed now, so I haven't weighed in so far, but I am watching and may make comments at some point. ferret is a user I have collaborated with in the past, and in general I trust their judgement. That doesn't mean ferret is automatically right, but their concerns should be taken seriously. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:35, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Please don't use such loaded language to describe a simple content discussion as "unusual and extensive opposition", especially consider how bad your first edit was, which set the tone for following edits. Your language usage reads strangely as I've pointed out. Take some time to see what other opinions form. Wikipedia does not rush, and discussions like this typically take several days to ensure interested editors have a chance to see it. Reinstating your edits repeatedly is what garnered your warning. -- ferret (talk) 00:40, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

The reason for the repeated edits was already noted, above. Please refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Dolley_Madison moving forward.