User talk:Hippo43/Archives/2022/November

Discuss not simply revert
Just reverting endlessly and asserting you are right is not the way to resolve a content dispute, especially when numerous editors are in disagreement with you. Please discuss it on the article's talk page. Timrollpickering (talk) 21:45, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Edit Warring
Your recent editing history at Ronaldo (Brazilian footballer) 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; read about 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. 80.193.80.241 (talk) 09:51, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 22
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of New Zealand national rugby union team player records, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fullback.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Your edits of the International rugby union eligibility rules article
Hi Hippo43. I have noticed that you have removed several paragraphs and sentences from the article International rugby union eligibility rules. The reason given in the edit summary is not always clear because you use abbreviations, but in several instances it is because you say it's unsourced or 'original research'. As you can read in Editing policy, Wikipedia in general is a work in progress; articles don't have to be perfect from the moment they are created and can be improved over time. Removing text (either one sentence or an entire paragraph) when you consider this text to be insufficiently referenced is not helpful and certainly doesn't improve the article. After all, if there is no (adequate) reference that doesn't mean that the text is untrue or incorrect. The Editing policy suggests several possible solutions to "fix the problem" (i.e. improving verifiability), including trying to do a quick search for sources and adding a citation yourself as well as, for example, requesting a citation by adding the tag at the end of the particular sentence/paragraph. It's also way more helpful to leave a message on article's talk page or the talk page of the editor who created the article (in this case that's me) or added the sentence/paragraph, and explain what you think the problem is with that particular sentence or paragraph and suggest what you think would be a way to improve that text, rather than bluntly deleting it. In the next few weeks/months, I will make an effort to find additional sources for the text that you deleted. In the mean time, I would be grateful if you refrain from removing text for the sole reason that you think it's not adequately referenced. That simply isn't the way to go about it. Obviously, that applies to all Wikipedia articles.

Another paragraph that you removed is the one that contained information about the eligibility rules in the Olympic Charter. The reason for inclusion of this paragraph was to show why the eligibilty rules in World Rugby Regulation 8 had to be changed after rugby sevens was included in the Olympic programme. This has to be shown because the rule change was (and still is) a deviation from the other, existing eligibility rules in Regulation 8 and it needs to be clear for the reader where this deviation comes from. Possibly, there are better ways to do this than that paragraph did, but – again – entirely removing the paragraph is not helpful at all (it's like throwing the baby out with the bath water). Ruggalicious (talk) 13:05, 24 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your message. If you don't mind, I'm going to copy this and reply at the article talk page.
 * Regarding your comments at the project talk page, please be careful of making broad ad hominem attacks. Removing unsourced or badly written content is improving the encyclopedia. I'm happy to discuss any particular edits you want. // Hippo43 (talk) 14:14, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)