User talk:Myrtlemc

February 2021
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Miranda Devine, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 07:59, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Miranda Devine, you may be blocked from editing. Melcous (talk) 22:52, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

There is nothing “disruptive” about correcting factual errors. You continue to reinstate demonstrably false and outdated material. I explained each edit so I do not understand why you feel entitled to override them. Where are you getting your information? Clearly, from the negative spin of your edits, you dislike this journalist. But that is not an excuse to insert falsehoods. It is not in Wikipedia’s interest to persist with false or outdated information. Where do we go with this? Myrtlemc (talk) 04:44, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * See WP:BRD - once a change to an article has been reverted, the next step is to take the discussion to the article's talk page and seek consensus with other editors for any proposed changes. It is helpful to specify which particular words, phrases etc you are suggesting be changed, and to provide reliable sources to verify why, rather than simply deleting whole sections of the current article. You might also consider checking the edit history and notifying any editors who contributed to the existing content, which I should note, was not me. Melcous (talk) 05:26, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia suggests when two editors disagree they should attempt to sort it out between themselves first. You have not explained why you accused me of “disruptive” editing and threatened that I would be blocked for correcting factual errors and outdated material. Again, how do you have the authority to override my edits, which were explained in the space provided at the bottom of the page. I’m not sure if you saw the explanations. Perhaps you have an editing privilege that is not apparent to the average user. But if that is the case, it should be divulged. Otherwise, are you not yourself liable to be blocked from editing by continuing to reinstate material you have been told is false and outdated - as rudimentary research would show. Your talk page shows a history of complaints about bias, “bullying”, questionably motivated editing and an obsessive focus on certain pages and issues. This is not a healthy situation for Wikipedia. I respectfully request you revisit your reversal of my edits with a modicum of humility, or explain each reversal before we either try to come to an accommodation or escalate this dispute. Myrtlemc (talk) 05:59, 15 February 2021 (UTC)