User talk:Pterosaurus

Just a test.

Repeated reversions
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Pterosaur. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --McGeddon (talk) 14:40, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Simple logic or not, it requires a citation. MMartyniuk (talk) 22:40, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi again Pterosaurus, you recently added a large section with simple parenthetical citations that don't refer to anything in the current bibliography. In the future, please provide full in-line citations for your sources, or other editors will be forced to repeat your research to find the complete source. Thanks! MMartyniuk (talk) 23:12, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Undo
Hello, Pterosaurus. To answer your question, yes, I have undone one of your edits, mainly because it's an unsourced claim regardless of "simple logic". Albertonykus (talk) 02:07, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Convention? I guess so. However, since others had explained before me I felt it wasn't necessary. Albertonykus (talk) 00:23, 25 July 2010 (UTC)