User talk:Scott.mcnab78

April 2021
Hello, I'm CommanderWaterford. I noticed that in this edit to Mike Harris Jr., you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:46, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Mike Harris Jr., without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that.   — Saadrafiq4 (talk) 18:54, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Mike Harris Jr., you may be blocked from editing. CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:16, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello CommanderWaterford, I am trying to remove this said content because the page must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV). The said content in question has editorial bias.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Mike Harris Jr.. 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. — SkiM askA ⭐(💬Talk) 19:46, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Mike Harris Jr. 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. Lomrjyo (talk) 00:00, 9 April 2021 (UTC)