User talk:Orriecather

Concern about promotion of links from Lee Phillips
Greetings! Thank you for your interest in editing Wikipedia and improving the quality of the information on this site. However, in reviewing your contributions to Wikipedia, they almost all seem to be for adding links relating to articles by "Lee Phillips". This could cause your account to be flagged as a "single purpose account" that exists to promote the work of Lee Phillips. Please note that if you are connected to Lee Phillips in some way (e. friend, co-worker, acquaintance), you may have a conflict of interest or "COI" in Wikipedia language. The "plain and simple guide to COI" may be easier to understand - essentially, accounts should not be created simply to insert links related to someone you know. You may also want to read "What Wikipedia is Not" to understand more of the conventions used in the English Wikipedia. Again, if you know Lee Phillips, I would encourage you to refrain from adding more links to their articles. Thanks again for your interest in adding more info to Wikipedia. If you have any questions about this, please feel free to leave a comment here and I can reply. - Dyork (talk) 02:09, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

April 2021
Hi Orriecather! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor&#32;at Blanchard's transsexualism typology that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information.    Sr ey Sr os talk 19:49, 13 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Also, please can you try to remember to use an edit summary when you make a change? It helps people to understand why you are doing what you are doing. Thanks. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:39, 13 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Maybe I should have been more specific in my previous request. Please can you try to use an accurate edit summary when you make a change? An edit summary saying "Removed unnecessary jargon" when you are removing a word that is necessary for the text to make coherent and unambiguous sense is not helpful. Please take more care. --DanielRigal (talk) 22:54, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Blanchard's transsexualism typology. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, 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 their editing privileges on that page. 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 result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. Sangdeboeuf (talk) 20:57, 13 April 2021 (UTC)