User talk:Hotpass105

Welcome!
Hello, Hotpass105, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to Religious male circumcision 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 New contributors' help 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! Jayjg (talk) 18:56, 1 May 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

————————

Hi Jayjg,

I am sorry you have this impression of my work. Please cite and explain where/how my contributions violate this rule. I would appreciate you using my most recent edited version, as I have continue to make refinements to my own work.

Thanks, Hotpass105 (talk) Dayton C.
 * Hotpass, you've just started editing with this account, and have started in a contentious area. One of the articles in particular is a well developed article with "Good Article" status, so there is certainly no pressing need to immediately "fix" it and insert material into it. It is also a medical article, and medical articles on Wikipedia have even stricter sourcing requirements than most other articles. I would strongly recommend that, rather than edit-warring with other editors on these articles, you discuss proposed edits on the article talk pages, and come to agreement first, before attempting to insert text into the articles themselves. Also, when editing talk pages, the convention is to insert a colon before your text (and subsequently two colons, three colons) etc., and not to insert any blank lines. This makes the conversation much easier to read and follow. See WP:THREAD. Jayjg (talk) 13:15, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

May 2019
Your recent editing history at Religious male circumcision 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 BRD 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 don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jayjg (talk) 19:01, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

September 2019
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Circumcision; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Alexbrn (talk) 11:54, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

October 2019
Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Circumcision. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Best not to add original research which incorrectly claims to be supported by a source which it doesn't cite. Alexbrn (talk) 11:36, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Alexbrn wants List of countries by prevalence of genital cutting renamed and dismembered
Thought it might interest you: Talk:List_of_countries_by_prevalence_of_genital_cutting Guarapiranga (talk) 09:31, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:CANVASSING is a bad idea. Alexbrn (talk) 09:38, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
 * do you ever read the policy links you post? Guarapiranga (talk) 12:14, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, and it's obvious you're just contacting the WP:SPA who agreed with you at AN3, with a non-neutral notification to boot. Other editors who have edited the topic, you did not ping. This is blatant canvassing. Alexbrn (talk) 12:32, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

July 2020
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Circumcision; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Alexbrn (talk) 16:23, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Alert
~Swarm~ {sting} 05:27, 9 July 2020 (UTC)