User talk:Sparkyscience/Archives/2017/June

June 2017
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at RF resonant cavity thruster, you may be blocked from editing. - MrX 16:33, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at RF resonant cavity thruster shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.''I suggest that you self-revert until the talk page discussion has concluded. You may have already violated WP:3RR.'' - MrX 17:53, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Copyright
Hi Sparkyscience. Thank you for your substantial contributions. I just removed a WP:COPYVIO that you inserted here and I'm going remove any others that I find. I see that you have previously been warned about violating copyright here, here, and here.

I think will back me up when I say that this will probably be your last warning. If you again add copyrighted material to Wikipedia in violation of WP:COPYVIO you may be blocked from editing.- MrX 14:48, 14 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Although you've no doubt done this to wind me up, I do actually appreciate you going through the article with a fine tooth-comb.--Sparkyscience (talk) 15:32, 14 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm not trying to wind you. I'm trying to get you listen to your experienced editors and realize that you are making some serious mistakes. I'm not trying to diminish your contributions, but at the same time, you should not have to be told multiple times not to violate our important policies (Copyright, edit warring and original research). I hope you will take this to heart.- MrX 15:38, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Certainly take mistakes to heart on copyight, but citing multiple standard textbooks all of which say the same thing on a basic concept is not original research. You know this. And its a shame you can't admit you were too trigger-fingered in deleting a basic concept you were not familiar with. You can't be an experienced editor in every topic.-Sparkyscience (talk) 15:52, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Copyright violations after four warnings. - MrX 17:16, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Einstein–Cartan–Evans theory for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Einstein–Cartan–Evans theory is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Einstein–Cartan–Evans theory (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Physics Dafydd (talk) 11:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)