User talk:Infernodragonpebbles

March 2020
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Chess strategy, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. - FlightTime Phone  ( open channel ) 00:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Chess strategy, you may be blocked from editing. - FlightTime Phone  ( open channel ) 00:05, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Ok, I understand the message. I was going to cite www.chess.com but did not have the opportunity to do so. My apologies. Infernodragonpebbles (talk) 00:08, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Your understanding of chess strategy is also rather elementary. A bishop pair is not always a good thing! Read Jeremy Silman's How to Reassess Your Chess closely before making further such edits (that book would be a much better source than a beginner's guide to chess).--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

In endgame, a bishop pair is always better than a knight pair because you can mate with it whereas you cannot with a knight pair. That’s what I typed, and it’s the truth. Infernodragonpebbles (talk) 00:20, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * But not always in the opening or middlegame. And also, a closed endgame position where both bishops are confined is favorable to knights. And that is just one of many inaccuracies you posted. I sense you are a beginner in chess; in that case, you should adhere to what respected texts like Silman's say (i.e. reliable sources).--Jasper Deng (talk) 01:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Edit warring
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Chess strategy; 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. - FlightTime Phone  ( open channel ) 00:07, 15 March 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.

Understood. Infernodragonpebbles (talk) 00:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)