User talk:Lib2003

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 12:12, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

November 2017
Your recent editing history at Mark Schwahn shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 your 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. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:06, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Darkness Shines: Can you explain why I am being threatened with a ban, but the person who has made edit after edit in 24 hours to eliminate sourced facts that I have included and bias the article by erasing the specific charges of sexual abuse by 45 women (and the names of famous women among them, as well as their quotes) in order to minimize the alleged abuse - while naming and quoting the ONE woman who has said it did not happen and giving that its own paragraph and much more weight in the article - is allowed to continue their edit war without consequence? Lib2003 (talk)