User talk:Mikesmithonepercenter

June 2015
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, 2015 Waco shootout. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. John from Idegon (talk) 00:04, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at 2015 Waco shootout. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. dalahäst (let's talk!) 00:09, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at 2015 Waco shootout. John from Idegon (talk) 01:17, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing (see note below). If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice:. Floquenbeam (talk) 01:48, 2 June 2015 (UTC) Not quite sure how you missed the messages above, but hopefully now I have your attention. You aren't going to be able to force through your desired edits; if people disagree, you need to discuss things on the talk page. I'll also note that I think that's going to be difficult; you're espousing what many would consider a fringe view. Still, if you agree not to edit the article again without first gaining consensus, I can unblock you. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:50, 2 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I've blocked the IP address you're using to evade this block. Further block evasion will result in the page being semi-protected so that IP editors aren't able to contribute to it. --Floquenbeam (talk) 09:57, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

2015 Waco shootout
Hello Mikesmithonepercenter,

I say this with sincerity and a hope that you will slow down and reconsider. If you continue on your current confrontational path, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. And then you will have no influence in shaping this article. Yes, there are a lot of questions about what happened in Waco. If you read the article's talk page, you can see that I was questioning how many were killed by bikers as opposed to how many were killed by the police from the very beginning. Every article here on Wikipedia can be improved, especially those on recent controversial events. But there is a proper way to do that, in accordance with our policies and guidelines.

Initial reports after a violent incident are often riddled with errors. As time goes by, more detailed reporting often emerges which gives a different picture. For example, we still have no good reports about how many of the dead were killed by police bullets.

You should post on the talk page for now, pointing out specific problems that you see with the article, and making specific suggestions for improvement. If you are reasonable and calm, I will support you. But if you get all indignant and act contrary to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, I will not be able to help you. Think about it. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  01:59, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I see that I finished writing my message above a few minutes after you had already been blocked. If you ponder what several editors have said, and slow down, calm down and understand that Wikipedia articles are built on consensus, then perhaps you can give assurances that you will not be disruptive, and can be unblocked. Think before you speak. You can still discuss things here on your talk page, as long as you are reasonable. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  02:05, 2 June 2015 (UTC)