User talk:RaMb0VII

1994 Northridge earthquake
Do you not see that with your addition there are two times listed in the article? Can I ask you how you think that's helpful. Did you consider the name changes when you simply reverted? Dawnseeker2000  02:52, 17 October 2014 (UTC)


 * The article is fine with the exact time being added, it only adds to it's accuracy. Please stop removing it, thank you. RaMb0VII (talk) 02:58, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

The article needs to be kept as simple as possible, and there should not be any contradicting information; you must surely understand that. Thanks for helping to point out that the ref in the lead was not accurately reflected in the text. I have corrected this now (4:31 to 4:30) so the article has been improved, even after a little back and forth. Thanks again, Dawnseeker2000   03:00, 17 October 2014 (UTC)


 * No problem. RaMb0VII (talk) 03:03, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

You are a brand new editor with several edits under your belt. Because of that I know that you don't know what you're doing. The Stover & Coffman source says the same thing that your ref does. The article was fine the way it was. I'll add the fifteen seconds in there. Dawnseeker2000  03:04, 17 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I have a question for you, why do you keep removing the exact time of the earthquake? RaMb0VII (talk) 03:07, 17 October 2014 (UTC)


 * So you want to ask me questions but you won't answer mine, huh?

I got caught in an edit conflict saving the article, last time you made a change to it. I'd changed it to add the :15 seconds, while retaining the Stover source. I have done this (again) and so you've got the :15 seconds in there while retaining the existing source. That source even goes as far as saying 15.2 seconds. Dawnseeker2000  03:16, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

October
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, 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 be blocked from editing. 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. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Dawnseeker2000  03:07, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

September
RaMb0VII (talk) 09:58, 2 December 2018 (UTC)