User talk:Marc Tessera

Abiogenesis
Marc,

wikipedia has some rules as to
 * (a) what is inserted and how it should be styled
 * (b) what to do when there is a disagreement with other editors.

Some editors did not agree with what you added, and reverted your changes. Usual wikipedia policy ( WP:BRD) is that one should boldly make changes (you did that correctly; In case of disagreements, one should revert the changes (they did that correctly); and the editors must discuss the changes. However, No one seems to be doing that. reverting changes, and reverting the reversions is in very very bad form- its called edit warring. (if you make make more than 3 identical reverts in a day you could get blocked WP:3RR) go to Talk:abiogenesis and discuss with the other editors what you want, and what their objections are. Remember, stay calm, be nice and good luck. ask me for help (click on the red talk in my signature) Decruft (talk) 13:23, 3 February 2012 (UTC)


 * (from User_talk:decruft)I do not understand why it is not possible to add a new paragraph in the chapter “Other models” which, I suppose, is dedicated to other and possibly new approaches? Is the topic “Origin of Darwinian evolution rather than origin of life” an issue? Marc Tessera (talk) 13:23, 3 February 2012 (UTC)


 * lets continue this conversation here; it will be easier to follow. The topic itself is not an issue. I think, (but i am not sure) why your edits were reverted was because the language of the paragraph was such that on a quick read it must have seemed to be disconnected sentences or more uncharitably, post-mordernist mish-mash :P. Also, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a text book or a journal; so arguments and questions used in making a case for a topic are, well, not used. Instead, the existing views are just recorded.

I gather that you have already published work in shifting the way this subject is addressed. I will try to rephrase the paragraph. Do tell me what you think of it after I am done. Decruft (talk) 14:23, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Warning for edit-warring.
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 18:30, 9 March 2012 (UTC)