User talk:Nchs 89

Your edits on Autism Research Institute
You and your two compatriots are going to have to work with others and submit to review the kind of wholesale removals you've been making. In general information which is properly sourced needs justification for its deletion.

Also, it's apparent at least one of you has a conflict of interest. Please read Conflict of interest before proceeding further. Mangoe (talk) 00:35, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

No conflict here - I'm a journalist. The citations used in the reverted article do not provide evidence of a staunch position. I first noticed it when I was writing an article for Autism Awareness month and corrected it after I noticed the COI that occurred earlier this year.

May 2014
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Autism Research Institute. 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.You have been reverted, resolve discussion on talk before re adding content. MrBill3 (talk) 00:43, 10 May 2014 (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.

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "slanderous statements". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot   operator  /  talk 05:33, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Warning
You are engaged in tendentious editing advancing a fringe point of view. This is unacceptable per Wikipedia policies. As an editor with no other interests on Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further warning if this continues. Guy (Help!) 16:51, 10 May 2014 (UTC)