User talk:MorrisonRemickWaite

Citizenship Clause
Hi. Please come to the "talk page" for this article (Talk:Citizenship Clause) and discuss the reasons why you believe this new material is important in order to clarify and expand upon the meaning of the "jurisdiction" phrase of the Citizenship Clause. You've already had one editor object (twice!) to your changes on the grounds that you have not cited any sources (per Wikipedia's reliable sources policy). I am also troubled by these changes and am concerned that you may be giving undue weight to a position (possibly a fringe view) that, again, would need to be backed up by reliable sources in order to be included here. Whatever you do, please don't simply add your change again without entering into a good-faith discussion with others and attempting to reach a consensus — otherwise, you could risk being blocked from editing for violating the prohibition against edit warring. — Rich wales 20:53, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

April 2012
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Citizenship Clause. 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. Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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. — Rich wales 21:25, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.