User talk:Motsebboh

Oops
Sorry. I was in the process of deleting my warning when you beat me to it. I prematurely issued a warning that was not appropriate; only two of your edits were actually reverts. The article on the SPLC is controversial and you probably should follow BOLD, revert, discuss cycle when making significant changes to the article. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 19:11, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions notice
-- slakr \ talk / 03:48, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Agh
I edit-conflicted with you at the CPC article in the course of making mostly minor fixes (broken refs and the like), but I've got to run. I'll take a look later, sorry. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:38, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

It's okay, I'm a fairly leisurely editor. Motsebboh (talk) 00:29, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 25 September
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
 * On the Planned Parenthood 2015 undercover videos controversy page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=682728226 your edit] caused a cite error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F682728226%7CPlanned Parenthood 2015 undercover videos controversy%5D%5D Ask for help])

FYI
You have managed, in an early edit, to cross paths with one of the most esteemed contributors to this encyclopedia, one that gives inordinate time and attention, in the sphere of his expertise, to move the encyclopedia toward excellence through his efforts on articles in Medicine. While he and I have not always agreed—at least once we have found ourselves on opposing sides of a pitched battle, where I did not present my best—I have found Doc James to be among the most even-handed, collegial, reasonable, and certainly hard working contributors here. If I were forced to choose a single individual for greatest impact at Wikipedia (based on an evaluation more rigourous than simple edit counts), I would be hard pressed to make a better choice than Doc James. He is certainly in the top 5% of all editors by virtue of positive impact.

This said, you have also managed to light upon one of his few editorial weaknesses, but one that means he is helped by thoughtful partners: he is indeed not the finest editor vis-a-vis classical grammatical and related skills. Perhaps an approach in the future, which would lead to mutual respect and productivity, would be to take the time to get an accurate "bearing" on the individual who has differed with you on an edit—are they an earnest, or a reactionary editor; a subject matter expert or a novice; etc.—and then proceed, assuming good faith, to work with them to improve the text of mutual interest, via edits that play to each of your strengths.

There is always cause to praise those who bring the most here; little reason to find a small matter of their imperfection, and trail it before other editors. Simply fixing the mistake, and a respectful "Tidied up your edit at XXX [for usage, grammar, whatever]" is more than sufficient. (Note that despite the lack of such grace and subtlety, the Doc's response was nevertheless a simple "Thank You.")

I wish you well, if this turns out a place you would also like to bring your expertise and effort to bear, for the slow, patient improvement of this important public encyclopedia. User:Leprof_7272 50.179.252.14 (talk) 13:18, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

A belated welcome!
Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Motsebboh. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * Editor's index to Wikipedia

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Questions, or place helpme on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! 220  of  Borg 04:19, 13 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Wow! Just wish those cookies were real!! But Thanks for the warm greeting. Motsebboh (talk) 04:22, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 21 February
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:16, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * On the Planned Parenthood 2015 undercover videos controversy page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=706139986 your edit] caused a cite error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F706139986%7CPlanned Parenthood 2015 undercover videos controversy%5D%5D Ask for help])

ANI courtesy notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Specifically, you were mentioned at WP:ANI. This is just a courtesy notice. Thank you.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 00:54, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Rona Ambrose is a pro-life feminist
Hello Motsebboh,

I noticed earlier you restored the inclusion of Rona Ambrose as a pro-life feminist. Please review the sources provided on the talk page, and share your opinion. Ontario Teacher BFA BEd (talk) 23:33, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

June 2016
Your recent editing history 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 article's 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. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:28, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Please also note that there is a 1RR on abortion. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 16:32, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Abortion
I've exhausted my single reversion for the day. Can you remove the dishonest suicide sentence? See Talk:Abortion for details. Jujutsuan ( Please notify with &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; talk &#x7C; contribs) 02:17, 22 July 2016 (UTC)


 * . Sure; but you've got give me a few hours since I reverted Doc James's original propaganda edit less than 24 hours ago. Regards. Motsebboh (talk) 02:33, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

November 2016
Hello, I'm Parsley Man. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Southern Poverty Law Center have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Parsley Man (talk) 02:17, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 5 January
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:15, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * On the Nina Rosenwald page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=758469139 your edit] caused a cite error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F758469139%7CNina Rosenwald%5D%5D Ask for help])

Edit War discussion
I've gone ahead and filed the complaint against Sleyece on the Admin page. Discussion will take place here.--Sunshineisles2 (talk) 16:20, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Abuse and Harassment
As co-conspirator in abuse and harassment Motsebboh has also been reported. I do not feel safe making "bold" edits. -- Sleyece (talk) 13:26, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Side note: Thank you for your warm testimonial. It can be viewed @ Sleyece --Sleyece (talk) 13:58, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Thanks for all of your assistance. While the criticisms by Ambassador Dermer will most likely not make the cut, to be on the front end of the article, I appreciate your efforts. TAG (talk) 22:12, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Center for Security Policy
Please review WP:BRD. When your Bold edit has been Reverted by another editor, the next step, if you continue to think the edit is necessary, is to Discuss it on the article talk page, not to re-revert it, which is the first step to edit warring. During the discussion, the article remains in the  status quo ante . Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:16, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * To Beyond My Ken: BRD is neither Wikipedia policy nor a guideline and your edit comment in reverting my edit was particularly inept. Motsebboh (talk) 22:26, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, fortunately for us all, occasional ineptness is not against policy, nor is it likely to draw discretionary sanctions, whereas repeatedly edit warring against WP:BRD is a "failure to adhere to ... any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process." Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:34, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

CSP
Okay, I see you were talking about a slightly different issue. (But the new section diverts attention from the rfc (as I was).) I suggest you move the comments back to the threaded discussion and preface them with "additionally the sentence in ..." Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 00:07, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

February 2017
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Center for Security Policy. 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 that 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.''I am not posting this message on BMK's talk page. He's been around a long time and knows the rules. Please consider this message as a word to the wise. Thanks.'' – S. Rich (talk) 03:34, 8 February 2017 (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.

Hello
I just wanted to drop you a note to let you know that you are banned from posting comments on my talk page, unless, of course, you are  required to  by Wikipedia  policy . If you are required to post a notice on my talk page, please clearly indicate in the edit summary what policy you are doing so under. Any other posted comments will be deleted without being read.Please note that this ban also applies to pinging me. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:05, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Chill. Motsebboh (talk) 02:11, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

AN/I
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:03, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

A warning for the forgetful
I believe I've asked you before to stop stalking me. I shouldn't need to ask again. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:00, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Gorka
Please be mindful of WP:3RR on this article. Thank you. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 16:13, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Point taken. Motsebboh (talk) 21:46, 1 May 2017 (UTC)