Warning
|
|
User warning: Three-Revert Rule.
You have come close to violating, or have already violated, the Three-Revert Rule. If you continue to edit-war, an administrator will block you from editing. Please reconsider your approach, and pay attention to the advice others provide.Please also note our user conduct policy; your recent edit summaries and messages have been highly uncivil for no reason. Cade |
Recent edits
GMan, I would suggest you review our user conduct policy, specifically the "Spirit of Collaboration" section, in which users as asked to not disrupt the site to prove a point. At this point, your continued targeted edits are approaching that threshold, as it has been expressed numerous times that we do not adjust our writing style to cater to grade-school children. Additionally, your edits were also reverted due to violating several of our policies, such as conjectural titles not being bolded in the introduction. Weebo's farm is written in explicit compliance with our Manual of Style, and your edits do not adhere to it; thus, they will continue to be reverted. Fred's suggestion on the nomination page was not to rewrite the article yourself, it was to suggest changes on the nomination page, especially considering your changes have been heavily contested by numerous users.
You are welcome to continue contributing to Wookieepedia, but I would strongly suggest you avoid rewriting other users' nominations, and cease rewriting content to cater to grade-schoolers. Wookieepedia is an encyclopedia, and our content is to be written as such. Continuing down this path will likely result in you being given cooldown blocks for disruption and/or harassment. Cade 
Calrayn 14:18, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
- Echoing Cade, you should not be rewriting an article that is nominated for status after disagreeing with the nominator. It is the nominator's prerogative to negotiate ways in which an article can be improved, not your prerogative to make unilateral changes—which is not what Fred suggested. We discuss ways to improve Wookieepedia, especially for status article nominations instead of imposing one's preferred standards, which is edit-warring. OOM 224 14:22, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Burowga
The reversion on burowga was done because we're using the decapitalization given in Star Wars Encyclopedia: The Comprehensive Guide to the Star Wars Galaxy. Bonzane10 
06:40, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
Sourcing
In future, if you're going to revert edits, you should at least actually add the sources in your edit, instead of reverting my edit without a valid reason and then just adding the sources in a separate edit. Please be mindful, I was perfectly within my rights to remove the information since it was unsourced Lewisr (talk) 19:31, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
- Sources are absolutely required per the policies I already linked to you. That point is more specifically referring to things like pronouns or ranks, there's no need to continually cite those, and therefore should just be at first uses. The paragraph would still need some sort of citation Lewisr (talk) 19:43, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
Blocked
You have been blocked from contributing for one week, for consistent edit-warring verging upon harassment. Additionally, Weebo's burowga is explicitly referred to with she/her pronouns; we go by what the sources say, not by appearance or assumption. In the future, you should use the nomination page to express disagreement with the way a status article nomination is written. Additionally, when you've been repeatedly warned about reversions and yet continue to obsessively target the nominations of specific users, it borders on harassment. If you choose to return after your cooldown block, I hope to see a more pleasant attitude and behavior.. To contest this block, please contact the blocking administrator with the reason you believe the block is unjustified. Cade Calrayn 18:21, 21 May 2025 (UTC)