User talk:Rhinopkc

March 2021
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Is Genesis History?. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Tgeorgescu (talk) 19:50, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Is Genesis History? shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Tgeorgescu (talk) 19:53, 14 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I do not know what you mean. The information is factually incorrect. I changed it. You cannot call something a scientific fact if it cannot be proven with the scientific method. Are you supposed to be accurate, or just not edit because it’s been reverted to inaccurate info enough times to make it stay? Rhinopkc (talk) 20:05, 14 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Yada, yada, your choice is simple: either kowtow to mainstream science or be gone from this website. Tgeorgescu (talk) 20:24, 14 March 2021 (UTC)