96.127.244.201

March 2015

Hello, I'm Amaury. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Meir Har-Zion, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Amaury (talk) 08:40, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Source

I didn't revert your revert of me, but please provide an updated source to replace source you removed to backup your claim . JC7V-constructive zone 21:48, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Which edit are you referring to?96.127.244.201 (talk) 22:01, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Ah, Gildan. I removed sources that had failed verification or were tagged CN, and had been tagged for more than five years. If you restore them it is up to you to provide good sources, as they have already been challenged and had five years to be fixed.96.127.244.201 (talk) 22:05, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

• Please discuss removing referencing on the talk page, your reasoning in your summary wasn't good enough. Please gain consensus for such a move. Please JC7V-constructive zone 05:07, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

I did, and my rationale was perfectly fine. The reference failed verification five years ago.96.127.244.201 (talk) 05:09, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Warning

WP:Overcite doesn't apply here. Your interpretation is wrong. I asked you to seek consensus on the talk page for removing it. ENough JC7V-constructive zone 05:20, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

• You're wrong. I have added seven sources to that page, and removed one per WP:OVERCITE. I am obviously here to build an encyclopedia, while you seem to be interested reverting good edits and leaving petty warnings. Stop bothering me please.96.127.244.201 (talk) 05:24, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Warning

I believe and know that your edits are not the right format and should not stand, but I am too new to change Wikipedia policy on that. Your edits may technically meet policies of this site, but those policies that allow your edits to stand are wrong. JC7V-constructive zone 05:28, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

• HELLO. You just admitted that edits meet policy. Please go away, and look at WP:HARASSMENT as if you keep hassling me and reverting my good edits (you removed THREE GOOD SOURCES last revert) we shall be at ANI.96.127.244.201 (talk) 05:30, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

August 2018

Your recent editing history at Avedis Zildjian Company 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—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—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:19, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hi User:Oshwah, please note that the Huffpost edit was only reverted once (or twice?). Other edits might look similar, but I have actually been adding sources (nine so far). I have zero interest in an edit war.96.127.244.201 (talk) 06:22, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Okay, that's fine. My main concern here is that the frustrations and issues between the two of you do not spill into the article. I left both of you the same warning in order to be completely objective and fair to both parties, and so that it's clear that both of you are expected to follow policy and refrain from battleground conduct. Nobody is being given special treatment or being treated differently. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:26, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, yes, I get it. to be clear, I removed the Huffpost ref twice and the other editor reverted it twice. I also added nine sources to the article, which might look like reverting but they were new sources. 96.127.244.201 (talk) 06:28, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

I managed to add fourteen sources to the article, all told.96.127.244.201 (talk) 08:28, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

---