User talk:WhiteHartInn

Edit conflict
Can you please refrain from editing articles with in-use tags. As a result I have lost my changes due to the edit conflict you have caused... UaMaol (talk) 16:09, 12 February 2024 (UTC)


 * That's not a problem, but see...
 * Template:In use
 * "The template is placed at the top of a page you are actively editing for a short period of time, no greater than a few hours at a time. The tag is intended to inform people that someone is currently working on the article, thereby reducing edit conflicts. Please do not leave it in place for longer than necessary, as doing so may unnecessarily discourage others from contributing to the article. Specifying periods of around a day or longer for this template goes against the spirit of simply avoiding edit conflicts...If this template has been left in place for more than two hours since the last edit, you may assume the placing editor has forgotten to remove it, and you may remove it yourself" WhiteHartInn (talk) 16:29, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

February 2024
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to William Campbell-Taylor, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. ''I have previously made it known to you that I am editting this page. This is now the second edit conflict that I have had with this page. Do not remove the inuse tag nor edit the page. WP:OWN applies to yourself also.'' UaMaol (talk) 23:50, 12 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Please see the comments I have added to your talk page., which offer fuller details, and reference policies.
 * I don't particularly mind your use of the InUse tag, but Wikipedia policies do not permit you to retain it for more than a day nor to leave it without editing for more than 2 hours. Wikipedia policies state that if left without your editing for more than two hours the tag may be removed.  Doing so is clearly not edit conflict.
 * Wikipedia policies do not allow the subject's self-published sources (or that of his personal friend copying/pasting the subject's self-published sources) to make allegations against third parties. Moreover as a public figure, Wikipedia policy requires WP:NPOV
 * including where respected, reliable and wholly independent sources such as a national church newspaper publish facts about current and live legal proceedings in relation to the subject. This is not disruptive editing but Wikipedia policy compliance. WhiteHartInn (talk) 00:37, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
 * PS. I am happy to avoid editing conflict and discuss collaboration in the editing of this page which is what editors ought to be doing.  Not WP:OWN by anyone. WhiteHartInn (talk) 00:40, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

April 2024
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on William Campbell-Taylor. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. UaMaol (talk) 19:18, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.


 * Disruptive editing and repeated reverting by user UaMaol against prior discussion and stable edit of wikiarticle (see previous chat on that user's page), and persistent WP:OWN hence bulk of the current wikiarticle edit is work of this one user. UaMaol exhibiting this evident WP:OWN behaviour repeatedly reverts every single edit that I have made where I directly cite uncontested agreed reliable sources, while I (despite being unhappy with a number of their edits) have not reverted UaMaol's multiple edits and frankly their dominant control over the great bulk of the wikiarticle content whose editing is the work of this single user.  If this is not the definition of WP:OWN then frankly what is?  This issue has previously been discussed of WP:BLPSELFPUB #2 and WP:BLPPUBLIC, edited for compliance with #2, and for WP:NPOV.  Previously discussed that the quoted article is a copy-and-paste job of the subject's self-published source and that article author has WP:COI relationship to subject.  Direct quotes from reliable sources are required given the contentious subject matter against any wikieditor's biased "spin" WP:NPOV.  User UaMaol is not an Administrator or Bureaucrat yet the conduct of throwing their weight around appears to be a pattern in the interaction by this user with some other users as well. WhiteHartInn (talk) 10:21, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * You're literally complaining about me, to me... You are also not an Administrator or Bureaucrat yet your actions and writings sound like you're trying very, very hard to sound like one! UaMaol (talk) 02:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)